Post on 20-Jun-2018
transcript
University of Washington
Center for Continuing Education in Rehabilitation (CCER)
Washington Division of Vocational
Rehabilitation Services
and
State Rehabilitation Council
Comprehensive Statewide Needs Assessment
Final Report
Submitted to:
Washington State Rehabilitation Council
Washington Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Services
Prepared by:
Center for Continuing Education in Rehabilitation (CCER)
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine
University of Washington
June 30th, 2014
Washington DVR CSNA 2
Acknowledgements
The comprehensive statewide needs assessment (needs assessment) conducted on
behalf of the Washington State Rehabilitation Council (SRC) and the Division of
Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) could not have been accomplished without the
assistance of a number of individuals who contributed greatly to various phases of the
project. The following individuals were instrumental in reviewing and modifying the
methodology and instruments as well as providing context for the data outcomes:
Andres Aguirre, Director, Washington DVR;
Philip Bradford, Member, SRC, Labor Representative;
Brian Clark, Senior Systems/Business Analyst, Washington DVR;
Phyllis Hansen, Program Administrator, Washington DVR;
Mike Hudson, Member, SRC, Business Representative;
Don Kay, Assistant Director, Washington DVR; and
Jim Larson, Member, SRC, Business Representative.
The entire project team would also like to express their appreciation to each individual
who took the time to share their experiences, opinions, and expertise by completing a
survey or taking part in an interview.
Washington DVR CSNA 3
Executive Summary
The Washington Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR), the State
Rehabilitation Council and the Center for Continuing Education and Rehabilitation
(CCER) at the University of Washington (UW) jointly conducted an assessment of the
vocational rehabilitation needs of people with disabilities in Washington. The purpose of
the assessment was to provide planners with information pertinent to the allocation of
resources, to provide a rationale for the development of DVR’s State Plan, and to comply
with the needs assessment mandate in the Rehabilitation Act of 1972, as amended.
The process that was developed for conducting the needs assessment involved
three data-gathering methods:
analysis of existing demographic and DVR case service data for the purpose of
identifying and describing Washington DVR’s target population and sub-populations
statewide,
online surveys conducted with three stakeholder groups (DVR customers, DVR staff,
and representatives of organizations that provide services to people with disabilities),
and
key informant interviews conducted with individuals identified as knowledgeable
about the employment-related needs of individuals with disabilities in the State.
This approach was designed to acquire a sense of the multi-faceted needs of people with
disabilities in the State informed by various perspectives. Surveys were completed by
1,552 current and former customers of DVR (15% response rate), 147 DVR staff (60%
response rate), and 335 service delivery partners. Key informant interviews were
Washington DVR CSNA 4
conducted with 24 individuals. This summary provides an overview of some of the more
important findings in the report.
Survey Results
DVR customers, DVR staff, and service delivery partners were all queried in the
following three topic areas:
services customers require to reach their employment goals,
customers’ challenges to accessing DVR services, and
suggestions on how to better support customers in achieving their employment goals.
The top three responses for each topic are compared across respondent groups and
summarized below.
Service needs. Participants were asked from their perspectives what services
were needed by DVR customers to reach their employment goals. DVR customers, staff,
and service delivery partners identified the following employment-related services with
the most frequency (see Table 1.1).
Table 1.1
Services Needed by DVR Customers for Employment
DVR Customer
(Current)
DVR Customer
(Former) DVR Staff Provider
1 Job placement Job placement Job placement Job placement
2 Job searching Job searching Mental health
counseling and
treatment
Job coaching
3 Community
college or other
vocational
training
Community
college or other
vocational
training
Vocational
guidance and
counseling
Job searching
Washington DVR CSNA 5
Additionally, DVR staff was also asked about the employment-related needs of
individuals with the most significant disabilities to achieve their employment goals. Staff
indicated that the needs for this group were somewhat different than the needs of the
general population of DVR customers (see Table 1.2).
Table 1.2
Services Needed by DVR Customers with the Most Significant Disabilities for
Employment
DVR Staff
1 Job placement
2 Job coaching
3 Vocational guidance and counseling
Finally, DVR staff and service delivery partners were asked what services were most
needed by transition-age youth with disabilities to achieve their employment goals (see
Table 1.3).
Table 1.3
Services Needed by Transition-age Youth with Disabilities for Employment
DVR Staff Provider
1 Vocational guidance and counseling Job coaching
2 Preparing for work after high school General work attitudes and behavior
3 Job placement Job placement
Job searching
Washington DVR CSNA 6
Access to DVR services. Participants were asked 13 closed-ended
(agree/disagree) questions about the challenges to accessing DVR services experienced
by all DVR customers. DVR customers, DVR staff, and service delivery partners
perceived that the most significant barriers to accessing DVR services for most DVR
customers were the following (see Table 1.4).
Table 1.4
Challenges to Accessing DVR Services
DVR Customer
(Current)
DVR Customer
(Former) DVR Staff Provider
1 Needing more
time with DVR
counselor
Waiting a long
time for services
Health issues
prevent the
customer from
meeting with a
DVR counselor
Customer does not
understand what
services are available
2 Waiting a long
time for services
Needing more
time with DVR
counselor
Customers does not
understand what
services are
available
Waiting a long time
for services
3 Customer does
not understand
what services are
available
Customer does
not understand
what services
are available
Customer and DVR
counselor disagree
about services
Customer and DVR
counselor disagree
about services
Difficulties
writing the
Individualized
Plan for
Employment
Needing more time
with DVR counselor
DVR staff and service delivery partners were asked an additional question about the
barriers to accessing DVR services for individuals with the most significant disabilities,
transition-age youth with disabilities, and individuals with disabilities who are members
Washington DVR CSNA 7
of a diversity group by race or ethnicity. However, neither DVR staff nor the service
delivery partners indicated that the access issues were any different for these groups.
Improvement to DVR services. In an open-ended question, DVR customers,
DVR staff, and service delivery partners were asked what DVR could change to improve
services. Suggestions for improvement to services were provided by 1,075 participants,
and the top three responses for each group are listed below (see Table 1.5).
Table 1.5
Improvement to DVR Services
DVR Customers DVR Staff Provider
1 Improve the efficiency of the VR
process from intake to employment
Hire more
staff/decrease VRC
caseload
Collaborate more
effectively with
service delivery
partners
2 Improve the quality of VRCs’ case
management skills
Allow more time to
conduct pre-
employment
assessments and
write IPEs
Improve the
efficiency of the VR
process from intake
to employment
3 Improve the quality of VRCs’
counseling skills
Improve quality of
service delivery
partners
Provide vocational
guidance and
counseling to DVR
customers
Quality of service delivery partners. DVR staff was asked to evaluate the
quality of service delivery partners. In a two-part question, participants were first asked
whether service delivery partners were able to meet DVR customer needs; a “no”
response required participants to rate the program on six criteria including poorly trained
staff, inexperienced staff, too few staff, services take too long to provide, do not provide
effective reasonable accommodations, and not enough providers to serve customers.
Participants indicated that CRPs; mental health programs; WorkSource; high school
Washington DVR CSNA 8
transition programs; and food, shelter, and clothing programs were not adequately
meeting the needs of DVR customers. According to DVR staff, the primary reasons why
select categories of service delivery partners are not meeting customer needs are the
following:
CRP staff lack the experience to serve DVR customers effectively;
there are not enough mental health programs to serve all DVR customers;
many WorkSource offices do not provide effective reasonable accommodations;
staff in high school transition programs lack the training to serve DVR customers;
and
there are not enough food, shelter, and clothing programs to serve all DVR
customers.
Key Informant Interview Findings
Barriers to employment. Key informants were asked to describe what they
thought were the top three barriers to employment experienced by people with disabilities
in the State. Informants identified the following three barriers with the most frequency:
1. Employer attitudes and workplace culture. Whether it is a general lack of exposure to
people with disabilities, presumptions about the cost of hiring people with disabilities,
or fear of the ADA, informants stated that most employers are still holding a gate-
keeping role in regards to the employment of people with disabilities.
2. Transportation. Although we already know lack of transportation majorly impacts a
person’s access to employment and education, informants cited this as a primary
barrier to employment for people with disabilities.
Washington DVR CSNA 9
3. Organizational or bureaucratic barriers. Several informants stated that there was, in
general, a lack of employment resources for people with disabilities in the State and
that the eligibility criteria for many of these programs limited many individuals’
access to needed benefits.
Increasing employment of people with disabilities. Informants were asked
what they thought was the most important thing that could be done to increase the
employment of people with disabilities. Not surprisingly, informants focused on
employers. Beyond DVR improving their efforts at employer outreach, informants
suggested that a campaign launched by leadership in State government is needed to send
the message that employment of people with disabilities is a priority in Washington.
Governor Inslee has issued Executive Order 13-02 to improve the employment
opportunities and outcomes for people with disabilities in State government. According
to the informants, attention should also be directed to employers in the private sector.
Improvement to DVR services. As in the DVR customer, DVR staff, and
service provider surveys, key informants were asked what they thought was the most
important change DVR could make to better serve people with disabilities. Two
recommendations emerged from these discussions. Informants stated that there should be
better collaboration among all of the stakeholders in the VR process including the DVR
customer, family members, DVR, service delivery partners, and employers. Some
informants stated that there was not a referral stream between DVR and their
organizations. For others, efforts at establishing partnerships between the organizations
did not extend beyond sitting on the same committees. Equally important to the
informants was quality VR services provided by qualified personnel. Some informants
Washington DVR CSNA 10
remarked that VRCs tend to function more like service brokers than counselors.
Informants stated that DVR customers benefit from the expertise of a rehabilitation
counselor; however, the current system does not permit VRCs to focus on counseling and
on building alliances with their customers.
Intended Outcome of the CSNA
It is anticipated that Washington DVR and the SRC will use this information in a
strategic manner that results in the provision of vocational rehabilitation services
designed to address the current needs of individuals with disabilities who seek
employment. This information may also assist Washington DVR in communicating and
collaborating with organizations that play a role in serving individuals with disabilities
throughout the State.
Washington DVR CSNA 11
Table of Contents
Impetus for Needs Assessment ......................................................................................... 11
Purpose of Needs Assessment ........................................................................................... 12
Description of Needs Assessment Process and Utilization of Outcomes ........... 13
Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 14
Analysis of Existing Data Results ..................................................................................... 16
DVR Customer Survey .......................................................................................................... 27
DVR Staff Survey ..................................................................................................................... 39
Service Delivery Partner Survey ...................................................................................... 53
Key Informant Interviews .................................................................................................. 64
Appendices:
Appendix A: DVR Customer Survey
Appendix B: Table B1
Appendix C: Table C1
Appendix D: Table D1
Appendix E: Table E1
Appendix F: Table F1
Appendix G: DVR Staff Survey
Appendix H Table H1
Appendix I: Table I1
Appendix J: DVR Service Provider Survey
Appendix K: Table K1
Appendix L: Table L1
Appendix M: Key Informant Interview Protocol
Appendix N: Model Programs and Evidence-Based Practices
Impetus for Needs Assessment
Washington DVR CSNA 12
According to section 101(a)(15) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
(Act) a needs assessment of the rehabilitation needs of individuals with disabilities
residing in the state is to be conducted jointly by each state’s vocational rehabilitation
(VR) agency and SRC in order to inform the State Plan for vocational rehabilitation
services. The Act is specific regarding areas that a needs assessment should address. In
addition to the overall need for rehabilitation services in the state, the Act focuses on
several VR subpopulations and services including individuals with the most significant
disabilities, individuals with disabilities who are considered minorities (and those
individuals with disabilities who have been unserved or underserved by the state VR
program), and individuals with disabilities who are served by other parts of the statewide
workforce investment employment system1. In response to this mandate and to ensure
that adequate efforts are made to serve the diverse needs of people with disabilities in
Washington, DVR entered into a contract with the Center for Continuing Education and
Rehabilitation (CCER) at the University of Washington for the purpose of jointly
developing and conducting an assessment of the vocational rehabilitation needs of people
with disabilities in Washington.
Purpose of Needs Assessment
DVR conducted the needs assessment to identify the current and changing
vocational rehabilitation needs of individuals with disabilities in Washington State. Input
was solicited from a broad spectrum of stakeholders including current and former DVR
1 Washington DVR identified transition-age youth with disabilities as an underserved population at the
onset of the needs assessment; therefore, questions about the employment-related needs of this population
were included in all phases of data collection and analysis.
Washington DVR CSNA 13
customers, service delivery partners, and DVR staff. The data that appear in this report
are relevant to the following activities:
projecting needed services and redeployment of services,
identifying common and unique needs of specific populations and sub-populations,
identifying perceived gaps in vocational rehabilitation services, and
providing data and a rationale for the development of the Washington State Plan and
amendments to the Plan.
Description of Needs Assessment Process and Utilization of Outcomes
The Washington needs assessment was designed in accordance with the VR
Needs Assessment Guide (2009) published by the Rehabilitation Services Administration
and involved three sequential phases of data collection and analysis (see Figure 1):
analysis of a variety of existing demographic and case service data relevant to
individuals with disabilities,
electronic surveys conducted with three stakeholder groups (current and former DVR
customers, representatives of agencies/organizations that provide services to potential
or actual customers of DVR, and DVR staff), and
key informant interviews conducted with individuals identified as knowledgeable
about the needs of individuals with disabilities in the State.
Washington DVR CSNA 14
Figure 1. Three-phase needs assessment process. This figure illustrates the timeline for
each phase of data collection and analysis and how the results of each phase were used.
This three-phase approach was designed to capture both quantitative and qualitative data
to describe in breadth and depth the vocational rehabilitation needs of people with
disabilities in the State. The use of multiple data collection methods strengthens the
validity of the needs assessment findings. Thus, the particular strengths of the
methodology used in the Washington DVR needs assessment are 1) the triangulation of
data from different sources, 2) the utilization of multiple methods of data collection, and
3) the integration of quantitative and qualitative data throughout the needs assessment
process. The results of the analysis of existing data were included in the 2014 State Plan
update, and surveys results were incorporated in the 2015 State Plan. It is anticipated that
findings from the key informant interviews will inform the 2015 State Plan update.
Limitations
All research methods are subject to limitations; therefore, it is important to
highlight some of the methodological issues that may limit the ability to generalize these
needs assessment findings to the population of people with disabilities in Washington.
First, the existing data utilized in this report were not originally collected to identify the
Analysis of existing data
• 5/2013 • 2014 State Plan Update
Surveys
• 6/2013-3/2014 • 2015 State Plan
Key Informant Interviews
• 4/2014-6/2014 • 2015 State Plan Update
Washington DVR CSNA 15
rehabilitation needs of people with disabilities in Washington; as such, the analysis based
upon secondary data is speculative and the conclusions drawn are tentative. The data
from these sources are often presented as estimates. Many of these estimates have been
drawn from small sample sizes and may have substantial margins of error. In addition,
the definitions of disability vary across data sources. Some of the approaches used to
define disability by these data sources included diagnosis based, function based, and
service based. Readers are encouraged to consider their knowledge of state and
systematic factors impacting the vocational rehabilitation of people with disabilities in
Washington when interpreting the findings presented in this report. The results of this
study should also be viewed within the context of the additional activities (surveys and
key informant interviews) that comprised the needs assessment.
Second, for both survey and interview methods, there is the potential for bias in
the selection of participants. The findings that are reported reflect only the responses of
individuals who could be reached and were willing to participate. Additionally, the
information gathered from participants may not represent the broader perspectives of all
current and potential stakeholders in the Washington VR program. Data gathered from
service providers, for example, may reflect only the needs of individuals who are already
recipients of services to the exclusion of those who are not presently served. Therefore,
although efforts were made to gather information from a variety of stakeholders in the
vocational rehabilitation process, it would be presumptuous to conclude with certainty
that those who contributed to the surveys and key informant interviews constituted a fully
representative sample of all of the potential stakeholders in the vocational rehabilitation
process in the State.
Washington DVR CSNA 16
Analysis of Existing Data Results
Description of Data Sources
A variety of existing data sources were reviewed for the purpose of identifying
and describing Washington DVR’s target population and sub-populations statewide.
These sources included the following:
United States Census Bureau 2011 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year
Estimates,
United States Social Security Administration (SSA) data for 2011,
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) data for 2011, and
DVR case service data for FY 2011.
Data from the ACS was used to describe the prevalence of disability in Washington and
the U.S. by various demographic factors. The ACS is a continuous data collection effort
conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau that is used to produce annual estimates at the
national, state and local level on the characteristics of the United States population. It
replaces the decennial Census long form and collects information on an annual basis from
approximately 3 million addresses in the U.S. For the needs assessment, SSA data was
used to describe the number of recipients of SSI and SSDI in Washington. Unlike the
ACS data, SSA data are not collected for research purposes2. SSA maintains a master
file on individuals and their characteristics in order to carry out administrative tasks.
Additionally, data from Part B of the Annual Performance Report to the Office of Special
Education Programs for Washington was used to estimate the number of transition-age
youth with disabilities in the State. Finally, FY 2011 DVR case service data was used for
2 SSA’s Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics does provide extractions of the master file for
research and other purposes.
Washington DVR CSNA 17
the analysis of secondary data in order to make comparisons with the most recent state
estimates of disability available. The DVR data used in this section was for all cases
closed between 10/1/2010 and 9/30/2011 where eligibility for services had been
determined.
Prevalence of Disability in Washington and the U.S.
This section examines the population estimates and the demographic
characteristics for individuals with disabilities in Washington and provides a comparison
with national data. According to 2011 ACS estimates, 12.4%3 of the population reported
a disability in Washington compared to 12.1%4 in the U.S. (see Table 1.1). Table 1.1
also compares the prevalence of disability for Washington and the U.S. by age and sex.
The prevalence of disability by age and sex in Washington was higher than in the U.S.
except for women 65 and older (37.6% and 37.9% respectively). ACS estimates also
indicated that the prevalence of disability increased for individuals in Washington and the
U.S. across the lifespan. In addition, disability was more prevalent for men 64 and under
in Washington and the U.S. than for women. In contrast, disability prevalence was
higher for women 64 and older in Washington (37.6%) and the U.S. (37.9%) than for
men (36.5% and 35.2% respectively).
3 Prevalence of disability in Washington regardless of age or sex.
4 Prevalence of disability in the U.S. regardless of age or sex.
Washington DVR CSNA 18
Table 1.1
Prevalence of Disability by Age and Sex for Washington and the U.S. in 2011
Washington U.S.
Percent of
population
w/disability
Total Percent of
population
w/disability
Total
Male 12.3 415,300 11.9 17,845,600
15 and under 5.0 35,942 4.7 1,573,371
16-64 years 10.6 240,500 10.1 10,099,900
65+ years 36.5 138,800 35.2 6,167,100
Female 12.4 421,200 12.4 19,480,500
15 and under 2.9 19,882 2.8 909,257
16-64 years 10.1 227,900 9.8 10,003,900
65+ years 37.6 173,600 37.9 8,567,400
Total 12.4 836,500 12.1 37,326,100
Note. Adapted from Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S. (2013). Disability Statistics from the 2011
American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Employment and Disability Institute
(EDI). Copyright 2010 by Cornell University.
Table 1.2 illustrates the prevalence of disability by race or ethnicity5 in
Washington and the U.S. based on 2011 ACS estimates. The prevalence of disability for
Washingtonians who are White (15.1%), Native American or Alaska Native (20.6%),
Asian (7.1%), and Other (9.0%) was higher than the U.S. estimates for these groups
(12.5%, 16.5%, 6.3%, and 8.6% respectively). However, the prevalence of disability for
5 Prevalence of disability by race or ethnicity regardless of age or sex in Washington and the U.S.
Washington DVR CSNA 19
Washingtonians who are Black/African American (12.3%) and Hispanic (7.3%) was
lower than the U.S. estimates for these groups (13.9% and 8.3% respectively).
Table 1.2
Prevalence of Disability by Race or Ethnicity for Washington and the U.S. in 2011
Washington U.S.
Percent of
population
Number Percent of
population
Number
w/disability w/disability
White 15.1 697,600 12.5 28,654,000
Black/African American 12.3 28,300 13.9 5,278,200
Native Am. or Alaskan Native 20.6 18,900 16.5 405,800
Asian 7.1 35,500 6.3 947,500
Other 9.0 56,200 8.6 2,040,500
Hispanic 7.3 57,500 8.3 4,286,500
Note. Adapted from Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S. (2013). Disability Statistics from the 2011
American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Employment and Disability Institute
(EDI). Copyright 2010 by Cornell University.
The prevalence of disability by type for individuals6 in Washington and the U.S.
using 2011 ACS estimates was also compared (see Table 1.3). The prevalence of hearing
disability (3.9%) and cognitive disability (5.4%) in Washington was higher than U.S.
estimates (3.4% and 4.9% respectively). Yet, the prevalence of visual disability (1.9%),
ambulatory disability (6.4%), self-care disability (2.6%), and independent living
disability (5.3%) was lower in Washington than in the U.S. (2.2%, 6.9%, 2.7%, and 5.6%
respectively).
6 Prevalence of disability by type regardless of age or sex in Washington and the U.S.
Washington DVR CSNA 20
Table 1.3
Prevalence of Disability by Type for Washington and the U.S. in 2011
Washington U.S.
Percent Number Percent Number
Visual disability 1.9 128,900 2.2 6,636,900
Hearing disability 3.9 263,100 3.4 10,556,600
Ambulatory disability 6.4 406,200 6.9 19,937,600
Cognitive disability 5.4 344,600 4.9 14,144,300
Self-care disability 2.6 164,400 2.7 7,697,500
Independent living disability 5.3 291,300 5.6 13,733,900
Note. Adapted from Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S. (2013). Disability Statistics from the 2011
American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Employment and Disability Institute
(EDI). Copyright 2010 by Cornell University.
Table 1.4 compares the employment rates for individuals 16-64 years by disability
status for Washington and the U.S. based on 2011 ACS estimates. As expected, the
employment rate for people with disabilities in both Washington and the U.S. is lower
than that of people without disabilities. However, the employment rate for
Washingtonians with a disability is higher than the U.S. estimates for that group (34.8%
and 32.6% respectively).
According to the 2011 ACS estimates, the employment rate for Washingtonians
with a disability is 34.8% while the employment rate for Washingtonians without a
disability is 71.0%. Based upon a total population estimate for individuals 16-64 years of
3,053,700, an additional 59,242 individuals would need to become employed in order to
close the employment gap between those with a disability and those without a disability
in Washington. While these individuals might be considered a DVR target population,
Washington DVR CSNA 21
some caution is warranted. These figures may illustrate the high end of the range of the
DVR target population as some individuals with disabilities may not wish to utilize the
services of DVR, may have disabilities that are not sufficiently severe to warrant DVR
services, or may voluntarily be out of the work force.
Table 1.4
Employment rates for individuals 16-64 years by disability status for Washington and the
U.S. in 2011
Washington U.S.
Percent Number Percent Number
With a disability 34.8 163,200 32.6 6,546,000
Without a disability 71.0 2,890,500 70.7 128,752,600
Note. Adapted from Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S. (2013). Disability Statistics from the 2011
American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Employment and Disability Institute
(EDI). Copyright 2010 by Cornell University.
Comparison of Needs to Washington DVR Service Provision
This section examines the demographic characteristics of Washington DVR case
service data for FY 2011 and compares it to population estimates and demographic
characteristics of individuals with disabilities in Washington. The DVR data used in this
section was for all cases closed between 10/1/2010 and 9/30/2011 where eligibility for
services had been determined. When interpreting the data for people with disabilities in
Washington it is important to keep in mind that while these individuals might be
considered a DVR target population these figures may illustrate the high end of the range
of that population. Some of these individuals with disabilities may not wish to utilize the
services of DVR, may have disabilities that are not sufficiently severe to warrant DVR
services, or may voluntarily be out of the work force. Furthermore, significant
Washington DVR CSNA 22
differences between the characteristics of the DVR population of clients (whose cases
were closed in FY 2011) and the characteristics of the population of people with
disabilities in the State indicate that more information than what is presented in this
report is needed in order to determine the reason for these differences.
According to 2011 ACS estimates for individuals age 16-64 with any disability,
468,400 individuals in the state reported a disability (see Table 2.1). That same year
DVR closed cases for 9,744 individuals. This constitutes 2.1% of the population of
people with disabilities in Washington. Data from Table 2.1 also indicate that the
proportion of men with disabilities is higher than the proportion of women with
disabilities in both the state (51.3% and 48.7%) and the DVR caseload (57.4% and
42.6%). However data suggest, that in 2011 more DVR cases were closed for men than
for women.
Table 2.1
DVR Clients Compared to People with Disabilities in WA by Sex in 2011
DVR WA
Percent of
cases closed
Number Percent of
population
w/disability
Number
Male 57.4 5,592 51.3 240,500
Female 42.6 4,152 48.7 227,900
Total 100.0 9,744 100.0 468,400
Note. Adapted from WA DVR FY2011 case service data and Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S.
(2013). Disability Statistics from the 2011 American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Employment and Disability Institute (EDI). Copyright 2010 by Cornell University.
Table 2.2 provides data on the racial and ethnic characteristics of Washington
DVR clients and individuals with disabilities age 16-64 years with any disability in the
Washington DVR CSNA 23
state. Individuals who identified as White comprise the highest proportion of both the
DVR caseload (75.1%) and people with disabilities in the state (81.4%). Individuals who
identify as Asian constitute the smallest proportion of the DVR caseload (4.6%) while
according to ACS estimates, individuals who identify as Native American or Alaskan
Native constitute the smallest proportion of people with disabilities in the state (2.8%).
Table 2.2
DVR Clients Compared to People with Disabilities in WA by Race or Ethnicity in 2011
DVR WA
Percent of
cases
closed
Number Percent of
population
w/disability
Number
White 75.1 7,320 81.4 381,200
Black/African American 10.9 1,061 4.1 19,400
Native Am. or Alaskan Native 5.6 547 2.8 13,100
Asian 4.6 449 3.7 17,100
Hispanic 8.9 870 7.5 37,600
Othera 8.0 35,000
Did not Provideb 2.6 251
Note. The race and ethnicity categories in this table are adapted from the ACS. WA DVR offers
individuals a more expansive list of categories from which to choose. The race and ethnicity categories
offered by DVR were collapsed in order to make comparisons between the two data sets. Adapted from
WA DVR FY2011 case service data and Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S. (2013). Disability
Statistics from the 2011 American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Employment
and Disability Institute (EDI). Copyright 2010 by Cornell University. aDVR case data was not provided for this category.
bACS 1-Year Estimates does not include a “Did not
Provide” category.
Washington DVR CSNA 24
Table 2.3 compares DVR closed cases with ACS estimates for people in the state
who reported a disability in 2011 by county7. Data suggest that a quarter of the DVR
cases closed were in King County (24.8%). The county that represented the smallest
proportion of cases closed in relation to the entire DVR caseload was Island (.38%).
According to ACS data, Cowlitz County has the highest percentage of people reporting a
disability relative to the entire population (20.8%) whereas Franklin had the lowest
percentage of people reporting a disability (5.6%).
The table is not representative of all the counties in Washington. The ACS has a
cut off for publishing 1-year estimates for small subpopulations by geographic area.
Therefore, there are no ACS data about the number of people reporting a disability for the
following Washington counties: Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Douglas, Ferry, Grant,
Garfield, Jefferson, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lincoln, Mason, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille,
San Juan, Skamania, Stevens, Wahkiakum, Walla Walla, and Whitman. With no ACS
data for a specific county, there could be no comparison to DVR case closure data. DVR
data do indicate that cases were closed in all of the counties except for Garfield.
7 Estimates for DVR clients and people with disabilities age 18-64 regardless of sex.
Washington DVR CSNA 25
Table 2.3
DVR Clients Compared to People with Disabilities in WA by County in 2011
DVR WA
Percent of
cases closed
Number Percent of
population
w/disability
Number
Benton 2.9 278 11.1 12,256
Chelan 1.7 165 8.5 3,711
Clallam 1.7 156 16.3 6,574
Clark 4.6 447 11.3 30,240
Cowlitz 3.1 295 20.8 12,635
Franklin .80 77 5.6 2,647
Grays Harbor 1.1 105 18.3 7,819
Island .38 37 12.4 5,416
King 24.8 2,400 7.8 103,398
Kitsap 6.7 644 13.0 19,466
Lewis 1.2 113 18.0 8,122
Pierce 9.9 954 12.6 62,738
Skagit 1.9 180 12.2 8,477
Snohomish 9.1 881 10.2 47,142
Spokane 8.3 805 12.0 35,394
Thurston 3.5 338 10.7 17,076
Whatcom 4.9 470 10.0 13,394
Yakima 5.3 509 10.7 15,144 Note. Adapted from WA DVR FY2011 case service data and U.S. Census Bureau, American FactFinder,
“Selected Population Profile in the United States 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.”
Estimating the population of youth in transition is a challenge since there is not
one definitive source for this data. State VR agencies tend to have different age
parameters for youth in transition. Washington DVR defines transition-age youth as
individuals 16-21 years. There are neither national data sets that use this same age
criterion for estimating disability prevalence for youth nor service systems that use this
criterion for service eligibility.
Using 2011 ACS 1-Year Estimates for individuals with any disability, 5.7% of
people with disabilities in the state were age 16-20 years (see Table 2.4). In comparison,
14.7% of DVR’s closed cases were for individuals 16-20 years. Additionally,
Washington DVR CSNA 26
Washington reported serving 6,843 students 18-21 under IDEA, Part B where as DVR
closed 1,423 cases for individuals 18-21 years.
Table 2.4
DVR Clients Compared to ACS Individuals 16 –20 Years with Any Disability in 2011
DVR
WA
Percent
of cases
closed
Number Percent of
population
w/disability
Number
16-20 years 14.7 1,147 5.7 26,539
Note. Adapted from WA DVR FY2011 case service data and Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S.
(2013). Disability Statistics from the 2011 American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Employment and Disability Institute (EDI). Copyright 2010 by Cornell University.
Estimates for individuals 18-64 years who received Social Security disability
benefits in Washington and in the DVR caseload were compared. In 2011, 2.1% of the
resident population in Washington received Supplemental Security Income (SSI) where
as 18.5% of DVR clients, whose cases were closed, received SSI (see Table 2.5).
Assuming all 93,806 SSI beneficiaries were eligible for DVR services, DVR served about
2% of this population.
Table 2.5
DVR Clients Compared to SSI Beneficiaries in WA in 2011
DVR WA
Percent of
cases closed
Number Percent of
population
receiving
SSI
Number
18-64 years 18.5 1,785 2.1 93,806
Note. Adapted from WA DVR FY2011 case service data and U.S. Social Security Administration Office
of Retirement and Disability Policy, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics SSI Recipients by State
and County, 2011.
Washington DVR CSNA 27
Additionally, 4.1% of individuals living in Washington received Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) whereas 38.5% of DVR clients, whose cases were closed,
received SSDI (see Table 2.6). Assuming all 179,595 recipients were eligible for DVR
services, DVR served slightly over 2% of this population.
Table 2.6
DVR Clients Compared to SSDI Beneficiaries in WA in 2011
DVR WA
Percent of
cases closed
Number Percent of
SSDI
recipients
Number
18-64 years 38.5 3,722 4.1 179,595
Note. Adapted from WA DVR FY2011 case service data and U.S. Social Security Administration, Office
of Retirement and Disability Policy, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics Annual Statistical
Report on the Social Security Disability Insurance Program, 2011.
DVR Customer Survey
Methods
Instrument. The instrument 8
used for the survey of DVR customers (see
Appendix A) was developed by the needs assessment steering committee through an
iterative process of generating items and refining language and content. The instrument
was designed to capture participants’ perceptions in three main areas: their employment-
related service needs; their experiences in accessing DVR services; and their
recommendations, if any, for improving DVR services. Participants were also asked to
provide specific demographic information for the purpose of describing the sample
group.
8 Two slightly different versions of the instrument were designed to capture the perceptions of both former
and current DVR customers. The only difference between the two instruments was in the verb tense of
question 10 and question 12. The online questionnaire was calibrated for this purpose.
Washington DVR CSNA 28
Participants. Participants for the DVR customer survey included individuals
who met the following criteria:
had been determined eligible for DVR services but had not completed an
individualized plan for employment,
had completed an individualized plan for employment and were receiving vocational
rehabilitation services through DVR,
had a case with DVR which was closed and were determined rehabilitated,
had a case with DVR that was closed for other reasons, and
had an email address on file with DVR.
This set of criteria was intended to result in maximum variation in responses (i.e., by age,
disability type, case status) and to provide an opportunity for as many DVR customers as
possible to contribute to the needs assessment. Participants included both current and
former DVR customers. Current customers were defined as individuals who had been
determined eligible or were in plan status and had an email address on record with DVR
as of September 5th
, 2013. Former customers were defined as individuals whose cases
were closed and had an email address on record with DVR from October 1st, 2012 to
September 4th
, 2013. The sample group consisted of 10,774 DVR customers.
Data collection. Prior to the inauguration of the survey, efforts were made to
alert DVR customers of the process. DVR staff was sent a brief description of the
process by the DVR Director via email and was instructed on how to answer questions
posed by customers. Also, written notices were posted in all DVR offices9.
9 Attempts were made to alert DVR customers of the impending survey by email. However, DVR’s
internal email system was not equipped to dispatch bulk emails. Efforts were abandoned after
approximately 1,000 alerts were sent to customers.
Washington DVR CSNA 29
The survey of DVR customers was conducted from September 5th
, 2013 to
September 23rd
, 2013. The survey was managed through SurveyGizmo, an online
software tool. Emails with links to the electronic questionnaire were sent to the sample
group. The emails provided context for the survey and included a statement of purpose,
criteria for participant selection, and information on how the customer’s data would be
protected and used. Individuals could request accommodations by contacting the
research coordinator by phone or email. Participation in the survey was voluntary, and
individuals could choose to opt out of future communications about the survey.
Confidentiality. Numerous efforts were made to ensure the confidentiality of
participants’ responses. First, DVR provided the researchers with customers’ email
addresses for the survey but did not include other identifying information, such as names
and phone numbers, that might be used to discern the identity of an individual. Also,
participants were not required to provide their names, phone numbers, or physical
addresses on the electronic questionnaire. In addition, responses to the electronic
questionnaire were aggregated by the researchers prior to reporting results, which served
to further obscure the identities of participants.
Accessibility. Several measures were taken to ensure accessibility to the survey
process. First, the instrument was translated into Spanish, and participants could access
the Spanish version of the questionnaire through a link provided in the email.
Additionally, questionnaires created with SurveyGizmo meet the accessibility and
usability standards outlined in Section 508 of The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended. Questionnaires are also navigable by most screen readers. Also, participants
could choose to respond by phone or mail rather than by the online
Washington DVR CSNA 30
questionnaire. Finally, in an instance where an individual could not complete the
questionnaire due to his or her disability, a family member, guardian, or personal care
assistant could respond on behalf of the individual.
Data analysis. Data analysis consisted of computing frequencies and descriptive
statistics for the survey items with fixed response options. Open-ended survey questions,
which yielded narrative responses from individuals, were analyzed by the researchers for
themes or concepts that were expressed with a degree of consistency by the respondents.
Completed surveys. Participants completed 1,552 questionnaires. Of the total
completed questionnaires, 1,529 were completed online, 15 questionnaires were
completed by phone, and eight questionnaires were completed by mail. The response
rate for the survey of DVR customers was approximately 15%.
Results
Participant characteristics. Of the 1,552 completed questionnaires, 1,376
(89%) were completed by the person with the disability, 165 (10%) were completed by a
family member or guardian, and 11 (1%) were completed by an individual’s personal
care assistant. Current customers of DVR comprised 67% (n = 1,047) of the respondents
while individuals with closed cases comprised the other 33% (n = 505). Of those that
responded, 1,035 (67%) were unemployed, 314 (20%) were employed part time, and 202
(13%) were employed full time.
Of the participants reporting gender, 849 (55%) were female, 692 (45%) were
male. Participants were provided with an “other” response option for gender. Nine
participants did not identify as male or female.
Participants were provided seven categories for age. These response categories
were not spaced in equal intervals to allot a specific category for transition-age youth
Washington DVR CSNA 31
with disabilities. Transition-age youth are defined by DVR as individuals 18 to 21 years
old. Individuals 50 to 59 years old comprised a majority of the sample (30%).
Additionally, participants were provided 17 response options for race/ethnicity,
including an “other” category. The majority of participants identified as White (85%),
followed by African American (8%) and Native American (6%). Nine individuals
identified themselves as multiracial in the open-response category (see Appendix B for a
complete list of responses for race/ethnicity).
Participants were also asked to name the county in which they lived. Most
participants lived in King County (32%), followed by Snohomish County (10%) and
Pierce County (9%). Tables 1.1 and 1.2 provide a summary of these participant
characteristics (see Appendix C for a complete list of responses for county)10
.
Table 1.1
Sample Demographics
Demographic Percent of sample Number
Gender
Female 55 849
Male 45 692
Age
18-21 8 121
22-29 13 195
30-39 17 256
40-49 22 345
50-59 30 464
60-69 10 155
70 and over 1 16
Race/Ethnicity
African American 8 116
Filipino 1 22
Hispanic 4 64
10
The sample for the customer survey is generally characteristic of the DVR target population on all
properties. However, customers who identified as African American, customers who identified as
Hispanic, customers who identified as male, and transition-age youth maybe somewhat underrepresented in
the survey sample.
Washington DVR CSNA 32
Native American 6 87
Other Asian or Pacific Islander 2 24
White/European American 85 1,310
Countya
Clark 7 104
King 32 504
Kitsap 4 58
Pierce 9 137
Skagit 3 41
Snohomish 10 160
Spokane 6 98
Thurston 6 97
Whatcom 6 87
Employment Status
Unemployed 67 1,035
Part-time 20 314
Full-time 13 202
DVR Status
Current customer 68 1,047
Former customer 32 505 Note.
aFrequencies less than 2% are not reported for county of residence.
Participants were asked to select their disability from a list of 23 options.
Participants were permitted only one response to this question. Participants were also
provided with an “other” response. A response of “other” required participants to specify
their disability. Write-in responses were analyzed and condensed into existing categories
or sorted into new categories.
Disability categories used in the customer survey differed from those used by
DVR for eligibility and reporting. The CSNA Steering Committee decided the DVR
disability categories, though functional for eligibility and reporting purposes, were too
broad for use on the survey. Therefore, the range of response options on the survey was
expanded to facilitate a participant’s self (or proxy) report of disability. Participants
identified behavioral/mental health (21%), musculoskeletal disorders (9%), learning
disability (7%), and hard-of-hearing (7%) with the most frequency. “Other neurological”
and “multiple disabilities” were new categories created from the “other” responses.
Washington DVR CSNA 33
Table 1.2 provides a summary of the response ordered by frequency (see Appendix D for
a complete list of responses for primary disability).
Table 1.2
Primary Disability
Disability Percent of sample Number
Behavioral/Mental Health 21 320
Musculoskeletal Disorders 9 135
Hard-of-Hearing 7 100
Learning Disability 7 110
Intellectual/Developmental Disability 6 98
Multiple Disabilities 6 98
Amputation 5 15
Autism Spectrum Disorder 5 77
Spinal Cord Impairment 5 69
Deafness 5 83
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder 4 58
Traumatic Brain Injury 4 67
Arthritis 3 50
Other Neurological 2 34
Diabetes 2 26
Epilepsy 2 24
Cerebral Palsy 2 23
Multiple Sclerosis 2 23
Drug/Alcohol Addiction 1 21
Stroke 1 16 Note. Frequencies less than 1% are not reported for any response option.
In a subsequent question, participants had the option to report any additional
disabilities11
. Participants were provided the same list of 23 conditions (plus an “other”
category). However, unlike in the preceding question, they could identify more than one
disability. Of the 1,194 participants who responded, behavioral/mental health (28%),
learning disability (21%), and arthritis (19%) were reported with the most frequency.
“Other neurological,” “multiple disabilities,” and “cardiovascular disease” were new
categories created from the “other” responses. Table 1.3 provides a summary of the
11
DVR does not record secondary disabilities as part of the eligibility process.
Washington DVR CSNA 34
response ordered by frequency (see Appendix E for a complete list of responses for other
disabilities).
Table 1.3
Secondary Disability
Disability Percent of sample Number
Behavioral/Mental Health 28 330
Learning Disability 21 250
Arthritis 19 225
Musculoskeletal Disorders 13 151
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder 11 134
Drug/Alcohol Addiction 11 128
Hard-of-Hearing 10 121
Vision Impairment 7 85
Intellectual/Developmental Disability 6 71
Spinal Cord Impairment 5 56
Traumatic Brain Injury 4 51
Autism Spectrum Disorder 4 47
Diabetes 4 43
Other Neurological 3 46
Multiple Disabilities 3 39
Epilepsy 3 30
Stroke 2 26
Cerebral Palsy 2 18
Cardiovascular Disease 1 12 Note. Frequencies less than 1% are not reported for any response option.
Service needs. Participants were asked to identify the services they required to
reach their employment goals. The CSNA Steering Committee developed a list of 30
services that were either provided by DVR in-house or by service delivery partners.
Participants could choose as many services as they perceived were necessary for their
individual goals. Participants were also provided with an “other” response. A response
of “other” required participants to specify the service. Write-in responses were analyzed
and condensed into existing categories or sorted into new categories.
Washington DVR CSNA 35
Current DVR customers (n = 1,047) identified job placement (56%), job
searching (53%), and community college or other vocational training (41%) with the
most frequency. Former DVR customers (n = 505) identified job placement (45%), job
searching (45%), and job coaching (36%) with the most frequency. Additionally, job
coaching for current customers (39%) and community college or other vocational training
for former customers (35%) were both identified as areas of high need (see Table 1.4).
Table 1.4
Service Needs
Service Current customer Former customer
Percent of
sample Number
Percent of
sample Number
Bachelor’s degree or above from
a college or university 28 291 18 91
Child care 5 47 - -
Clothing 28 288 19 98
Community college or other
vocational training 41 428 35 174
Electronic and information
technology (such as screen
readers or Braille)
8 82 6 29
Employer education about
disability 22 232 15 75
Food 17 177 9 45
General work attitude and
behavior 13 132 10 49
Housing 18 183 9 46
Job coaching 39 410 36 182
Job placement 56 587 45 226
Job searching 53 553 45 226
Keeping your job 26 268 16 81
Medical devices (such as hearing
aids or wheelchairs) 12 128 13 66
Medical diagnosis and treatment 10 104 10 52
Mental health counseling and
treatment 24 254 21 105
Modifying your job or school
environment so that you can do
your duties or tasks
20 205 15 75
Washington DVR CSNA 36
Money management 12 130 7 36
On-the job training provided by
your employer 30 318 18 92
Personal care assistance 5 49 5 23
Reading, writing, and math skills 9 92 5 24
Self-advocacy skills 18 184 13 65
Self care 6 62 - -
Social security benefits planning 18 190 13 63
Transportation 29 306 18 91
Vocational guidance and
counseling 33 340 28 139
Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
“Other” services for both groups included the following:
plans for self-employment,
medical/dental insurance,
tools for work or school,
medication,
internships,
legal assistance, and
computer skills training.
Access to DVR services. Participants were asked 13 closed-ended
(agree/disagree) questions about specific challenges to accessing DVR services.
Participants were also provided with an “other” response. A response of “other” required
participants to specify the access issue. Write-in responses were analyzed and condensed
into existing categories or sorted into new categories.
For both current (n = 1,046) and former customers (n = 504) the access issues
were generally the same. The challenge to accessing DVR services most frequently cited
by current customers was needing more time with a DVR counselor (36%) and by former
customers was waiting a long time for services (30%) (see Table 1.5).
Washington DVR CSNA 37
Table 1.5
Access to DVR Services
Access to DVR service Identified as a barrier
Current customer Former customer
Percent of
sample Number
Percent of
sample Number
Getting to a DVR office using
public transportation 13 132 9 44
No DVR office in the area 7 74 10 49
Getting into a DVR
building/office 1 13 2 12
Language barriers 3 26 3 15
Cultural barriers 4 41 5 26
Communication by email or phone
from DVR staff 14 86 15 76
Health issues prevent meetings
with a DVR counselor 7 72 12 58
Staff does not understand a
customer’s disability 13 137 19 93
Customer does not understand
what services are available 30 309 27 138
Difficulties writing the
Individualized Plan for
Employment
30 314 25 127
Waiting a long time for services 30 312 30 149
Disagreeing about services 16 167 25 128
Needing more time with a DVR
counselor 36 380 27 135
“Other” challenges to accessing DVR services for both groups included the following:
interpersonal relationships with the DVR counselors,
inefficiencies of the VR agency,
inadequate service from service delivery partners,
DVR services not meeting expectations,
closing a customer’s case without an employment outcome, and
VR counselor turnover.
Washington DVR CSNA 38
Improvement to DVR services. In an open-ended question, participants were
asked what DVR could change to improve services. Suggestions for improvement to
services were provided by 715 participants. Write-in responses were analyzed by
constant comparison, and themes were extracted from the responses. The frequency of
responses was calculated, and the results are presented in Table 1.6 in order of rank (see
Appendix F for a complete list of responses for improving DVR services).
Table 1.6
Improvement to DVR Services
Thematic category Rank Characteristic response
Improve the VR process 1
“It took 3 months for a return
call and 1 year to be assessed;
that is way too long.”
Improve the quality of VR counselor’s
case management skills 2
“My counselor can’t seem to get
in contact with me or forgets to
do paper work and services are
delayed.”
Improve the quality of VR counselors’
counseling skills 3
“DVR lady couldn’t understand
my grief about quitting my
profession of 20 years. She told
me to stop feeling bad. She
didn’t get it.”
Explain the VR process and/or the
services available 4
“Communicate more about what
services they can offer to a
client. I had specific needs, but
my counselor could have advised
me about more options.”
Allow more time with the VR counselor 5
“The only thing that would
improve my situation is spending
more time with my new
counselor looking over and
amending my current plan.”
Improve vendor services 6
“To help contractors to
understand that they should
respect the clients in and out of
the presence of DVR Staff. I
have experienced bad service.”
Provide more job development services 6 “They should have connections
in the community. They should
Washington DVR CSNA 39
be on the phone with companies
and tell them about disabled
people that want to work.”
Increase the DVR budget 7 “Ask the legislature for better
funding.”
Support two/four year college degrees 7
“Do more to promote higher
education to keep people from
being the working poor.”
Support self-employment as an outcome 7
“I have chosen to be self-
employed to control my work
hours and duties. Your staff
wasn’t very knowledgeable
about self-employment.”
Provide for customers’ basic needs (food,
clothing, housing) 8
“More temp[orary] financial aid
for things like groceries.”
Assist with pre-vocational skill building 8
“Let clients access job training
and work programs to gain skills
to improve chances of getting
and keeping employment long
term.”
Conduct more pre-employment
assessments 8
“Ask clients to take a job skills
test to focus on their strengths
and weaknesses.”
Provide more job placement services 8 “More job placement help. It is
hard in a down environment.” Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
It should be noted that not all feedback from participants was in regard to improving
services. An additional 263 participants expressed satisfaction with DVR services.
DVR Staff Survey
Methods
Instrument. The instrument used for the electronic survey of DVR staff (see
Appendix G) was based upon a modified version of the DVR customer survey:
Participants were asked their perceptions of DVR customers’ employment-related service
needs and of customers’ experiences accessing DVR services. However, participants
were also asked a unique set of questions that pertained to the needs of DVR customers
with the most significant disabilities, of transition-age youth with disabilities, and of
Washington DVR CSNA 40
customers who are members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity. An additional set
of questions asked participants to evaluate the services of service delivery partners. The
CSNA Steering Committee developed a list of 11 categories of service providers, which
included the following:
community rehabilitation programs;
independent living programs;
assistive technology providers;
medical providers;
mental health providers;
post-secondary education programs;
private vocational training programs;
community and technical colleges;
WorkSource;
high school transition programs; and
basic food, shelter, and clothing programs.
Furthermore, as in the DVR customer survey, staff was asked an open-ended question
regarding improvements to DVR services. The questionnaire included a few
demographic questions for the purpose of describing the sample group.
Participants. Individuals identified for participation in this survey effort were
DVR staff, as of November 6th
, 2013, in the following positions:
rehabilitation technicians,
vocational rehabilitation counselors,
vocational rehabilitation supervisors, and
Washington DVR CSNA 41
area managers.
This set of criteria was necessary to ensure that the sample was inclusive of individuals
who understood the employment-related needs of DVR customers. The sample included
247 DVR staff from all service regions.
Data collection. As with the DVR customer survey, data was gathered from
DVR staff through an online questionnaire and managed with SurveyGizmo. Participants
were sent an e-mail message by the DVR Director alerting them to the survey effort
approximately one week before the survey was released.
The survey of DVR staff was conducted from December 2nd
, 2013 to December
20th
, 2013. Staff was sent an electronic invitation and link to the survey from the DVR
Director. Approximately 10 days after the initial distribution, a subsequent notice was
sent as both a “thank you” to those who had completed the survey and a reminder to
those who had not. Participation in the survey was voluntary, and individuals could
choose to opt out of future communications about the survey.
Confidentiality. DVR provided the researchers with email addresses only for the
DVR staff survey. Respondents to the DVR staff survey were not asked to identify
themselves by name. Responses to the online questionnaires were aggregated by the
researchers prior to reporting results. This served to further protect the identity of each
respondent.
Accessibility. Participants had the option of three formats for completing the
survey: online, by phone, or by mail. Accommodations could be arranged through the
researcher coordinator.
Washington DVR CSNA 42
Data analysis. Data analysis consisted of computing frequencies and descriptive
statistics for the survey items with fixed response options. Open-ended survey questions,
which yielded narrative responses from individuals, were analyzed by the researchers for
themes or concepts that were expressed with a degree of consistency by the respondents.
Completed surveys. A total of 147 online questionnaires were completed by
DVR staff. The response rate for the survey of DVR staff was approximately 60%.
Results
Participant characteristics. Participants were asked to identify their job titles
from four choices: Rehabilitation Technician, Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor,
Vocational Rehabilitation Supervisor, and Area Manager. Of the 147 respondents, most
participants were Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors (61%), followed by
Rehabilitation Technicians (27%), Vocational Rehabilitation Supervisors (15%), and
Area Managers (2%). Additionally, participants identified their service areas. Most of
the participants were from Area 3 (39%), followed by Area 2 (35%), and Area 1 (26%).
Finally, participants indicated how many years they had been in their current positions.
Most of the participants had been in their current positions for one to five years (33%).
Table 2.1 provides a summary of these participant characteristics.
Washington DVR CSNA 43
Table 2.1
Sample Demographics
Demographic Percent of sample Number
Job Title
Rehabilitation Technician 27 40
Vocational Rehabilitation
Counselor
60 89
Vocational Rehabilitation
Supervisor
10 15
Area Manager 3 2
Service Area
Area 1 26 38
Area 2 35 52
Area 3 39 57
Years in Position
Less than 1 year 10 15
1-5 years 33 48
6-10 years 16 23
11-15 years 22 32
More than 15 years 20 29
Service needs general population. Participants were asked to identify the
services that were most needed by all DVR customers to reach their employment goals.
Participants could choose from a list of 30 services that were either provided by DVR in-
house or by service delivery partners. Participants were also provided with an “other”
response. A response of “other” required participants to specify the service. Write-in
responses were analyzed and condensed into existing categories or sorted into new
categories.
DVR staff indicated that vocational guidance and counseling (86%), mental
health counseling and treatment (78%), and job placement (77%) were the services most
needed by DVR customers to achieve their employment goals (see Table 2.2).
Washington DVR CSNA 44
Table 2.2
Service Needs General Population
Service Percent of sample Number
Bachelor’s degree or above from a college or
university 10 14
Child care 18 27
Clothing 43 63
Community college or other vocational
training 48 71
Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment 33 48
Electronic and information technology (such
as screen readers or Braille) 8 11
Employer education about disability 35 51
Food 12 18
General work attitude and behavior 67 98
Housing 33 49
Interpreters 14 21
Job coaching 58 85
Job placement 77 113
Job searching 66 97
Keeping your job 58 85
Medical devices (such as hearing aids or
wheelchairs) 25 37
Medical diagnosis and treatment 33 49
Mental health counseling and treatment 78 114
Modifying your job or school environment
so that you can do your duties or tasks 27 40
Money management 15 22
On-the job training provided by your
employer 27 39
Personal care assistance 5 8
Preparing for work after high school 31 46
Reading, writing, and math skills 32 47
Self-advocacy skills 40 59
Self care 19 28
Social security benefits planning 51 75
Transportation 61 89
Vocational guidance and counseling 86 127 Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
“Other” services included the following:
guidance on discussing a criminal history,
pre-vocational skill building , and
Washington DVR CSNA 45
computer skills training.
Service needs specific populations. Participants were then presented with a
series of questions about the service needs of specific populations of DVR customers that
included individuals with the most significant disabilities, transition-age youth with
disabilities, and individuals with disabilities who are members of a diversity group by
race or ethnicity. In a two-part question, participants were first asked if the services
needed by that specific population to achieve their employment goals differed from other
DVR customers. If participants answered “yes,” they were then asked to identify the
services most needed by that population to achieve their employment goals. Participants
were provided with an “other” response. A response of “other” required participants to
specify the service. Write-in responses were analyzed and condensed into existing
categories or sorted into new categories.
Participants indicated that the service needs of customers with the most
significant disabilities (69%) and transition-age youth (64%) were different from other
DVR customers. Of the 102 respondents, DVR staff indicated that job placement (85%),
job coaching (83%), and vocational guidance and counseling (77%) were the services
most needed by DVR customers with the most significant disabilities to achieve their
employment goals. Of the 94 respondents, the services most needed by transition-age
youth to achieve their employment goals were vocational guidance and counseling
(73%), preparing for work after high school (72%), and job placement (72%). Table 2.3
shows a side-by-side comparison of the responses for these two groups.
Washington DVR CSNA 46
Table 2.3
Service Needs of Specific Populations
Service Most significant
disabilities Transition-age youth
Percent of
sample Number
Percent of
sample Number
Bachelor’s degree or above from a
college or university 5 5 9 8
Clothing 16 16 8 7
Community college or other
vocational training 20 20 50 47
Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment 13 13 5 5
Electronic and information technology
(such as screen readers or Braille) 25 25 6 6
Employer education about disability 49 50 19 18
Food 6 6 - -
General work attitude and behavior 47 48 70 66
Housing 17 17 11 10
Interpreters 16 16 8 7
Job coaching 83 85 70 66
Job placement 85 87 72 68
Job searching 63 64 67 63
Keeping your job 71 72 56 53
Medical devices (such as hearing aids
or wheelchairs) 34 35 10 9
Medical diagnosis and treatment 27 27 10 9
Mental health counseling and
treatment 55 56 20 19
Modifying your job or school
environment so that you can do your
duties or tasks
51 52 21 20
Money management 17 17 35 33
On-the job training provided by your
employer 28 28 30 28
Personal care assistance 34 35 12 11
Preparing for work after high school 27 27 72 68
Readers 8 8 - -
Reading, writing, and math skills 24 25 39 37
Self-advocacy skills 37 37 56 53
Self care 37 38 30 28
Social security benefits planning 60 61 53 50
Transportation 56 57 18 91
Vocational guidance and counseling 77 78 73 69 Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
Washington DVR CSNA 47
In the open response category, participants indicated that DVR customers with the most
significant disabilities and transition-age youth need pre-vocational skill building to reach
their employment goals. Transition-age youth also need work experiences while in high
school.
Access to DVR services general population. Participants were asked 13 closed-
ended (agree/disagree) questions about the challenges to accessing DVR services
experienced by all DVR customers. If participants endorsed that customers could not get
to a DVR office using public transportation, they were asked to specify the office
location. Additionally, if participants endorsed that customers could not get into a DVR
building/office, they were asked to specify the nature of the access issue and the location.
Participants were also provided with an “other” response option. A response of “other”
required participants to detail the barrier to DVR services. Write-in responses were
analyzed and condensed into existing categories or sorted into new categories.
The challenges to accessing DVR services most frequently cited by DVR staff
were that health problems kept customers from meeting with their DVR counselors
(38%), customers did not understand what services were available to them (50%), and
customers disagreed with their DVR counselors about the services they needed to get a
job (25%) (see Table 2.4).
Washington DVR CSNA 48
Table 2.4
Access to DVR Services General Population
Access to DVR service Identified as a barrier
Percent of
sample Number
Getting to a DVR office using public
transportation 23 33
No DVR office in the area 15 22
Getting into a DVR building/office 0 0
Language barriers 12 18
Cultural barriers 8 11
Communication by email or phone from DVR
staff 5 7
Health issues prevent meetings with a DVR
counselor 58 85
Staff does not understand a customer’s disability 3 4
Customer does not understand what services
are available 50 73
Difficulties writing the Individualized Plan for
Employment 11 16
Waiting a long time for services 12 18
Disagreeing about services 25 36
Needing more time with a DVR counselor 19 28
“Other” challenges to accessing DVR services included the following:
individuals with disabilities are unaware of the VR program,
DVR customers do not follow through with their responsibilities, and
individuals are not ready for DVR services.
The specific DVR office locations that cannot be reached by customers using public
transportation appear in Appendix H.
Access to DVR services by specific populations. Participants were then asked
about the challenges to accessing DVR services by specific customer populations that
included individuals with the most significant disabilities, transition-age youth with
disabilities, and individuals with disabilities who were members of a diversity group by
Washington DVR CSNA 49
race or ethnicity. In a two-part question, participants were first asked if the difficulties
accessing DVR services by that specific population differed from other DVR customers.
If participants answered “yes,” they were then asked to identify the main reasons that the
population had difficulties accessing DVR services. However, a majority of DVR staff
indicated that there were no differences in access to DVR services by specific
populations (56%, 52%, and 64% respectively).
Quality of service delivery partners. In a two-part question, participants were
first asked whether a service delivery partner was able to meet DVR customer needs. A
“no” response required participants to evaluate the quality of the provider on six criteria:
poorly trained staff, inexperienced staff, too few staff, services take too long to provide,
do not provide effective reasonable accommodations, and not enough providers to serve
customers. Participants were also provided with an “other” response option. A response
of “other” required participants to provide further detail. Write-in responses were
analyzed and condensed into existing categories or sorted into new categories.
According to participants, providers that are adequately meeting the needs of
DVR customers include the following: independent living providers (54%), assistive
technology providers (77%), medical providers (63%), post-secondary education
providers (69%), private vocational training providers (38%), and community and
technical colleges (70%). The remaining providers were determined by participants as
not adequately meeting customer needs, and a summary of these responses is presented in
Table 2.5, and a narrative description of the responses follows.
Washington DVR CSNA 50
Table 2.5
Inadequate Provision of Services
Community
rehabilitation
programs
Mental
health
programs WorkSource
High
school
transition
programs
Food,
shelter,
and
clothing
programs
Variable Percent of sample
Poorly trained staff 57 19 44 40 8
Inexperienced staff 64 29 49 27 6
Too few staff 51 49 35 33 34
Services take too long
to provide 61 37 13 10 51
Do not provide
effective reasonable
accommodations
19 17 56 17 14
Not enough
providers to serve
customers
57 66 24 15 74
Note. For high school transition programs, the “other” category was selected by a majority of the
respondents (67%).
Community rehabilitation providers. Of the 147 respondents, DVR staff was
split on whether CRPs adequately meet customer needs: 47% indicated that CRPs do
meet customer needs while 46% indicated that they do not meet customer needs. DVR
staff cited inexperienced staff (64%) as the primary reason why CRPs do not adequately
meet customer needs. “Other” responses included:
a provider’s lack of cultural competency,
a limited understanding of a customer’s disability, and
poor communication and/or collaboration with DVR.
Washington DVR CSNA 51
Mental health providers. Most participants responded that mental health
providers do not adequately meet customer needs (54%). The primary reason was that
there are not enough providers to serve customers (66%). “Other” reasons included:
a lack of coverage for mental health services,
poor communication and/or collaboration with DVR,
a focus on crisis care rather than long-term supports, and
limited and/or inadequate counseling services.
WorkSource. Most DVR staff responded that WorkSource does not adequately
meet customer needs (49%). The primary reason was that WorkSource does not provide
effective reasonable accommodations. “Other” reasons included:
WorkSource staff lacks expertise in disability,
services are not individualized, and
WorkSource staff poorly communicates and/or collaborates with DVR.
High school transition programs. A majority of participants indicated that high
school transition programs do not adequately meet DVR customer needs (41%).
Although most identified poorly trained staff as an issue (40%), a larger portion of
respondents selected “other” (67%). “Other” responses included the following:
programs do not provide meaningful work experiences;
program staff does not understand the VR process and, therefore, does not refer
customers or collaborate effectively with DVR;
program staff does not assist youth in identifying appropriate vocational goals; and
a general lack of consistency among transition programs.
Washington DVR CSNA 52
Food, shelter, and clothing programs. A majority of participants responded that
food, shelter, and clothing programs did not adequately meet customer needs (60%). The
primary reason was that there are not enough providers to serve customer demand for
services (74%). “Other” responses included:
a lack of funding for these types of services,
eligibility criteria for many of these programs exclude many DVR customers, and
limited availability of affordable housing and shelters, especially in rural areas.
Improvement to DVR services. In an open-ended question, participants were asked
what DVR could change to better support customers in achieving their employment
goals. Suggestions for improvement were provided by 118 participants. Write-in
responses were analyzed by constant comparison, and themes were extracted from the
responses. The frequency of responses was calculated, and the results are presented in
Table 2.6 in order of rank (see Appendix I for a complete list of responses to improving
DVR).
Washington DVR CSNA 53
Table 2.6
Improvement to DVR Services
Thematic category Rank Characteristic response
Hire more staff/decrease VRC caseloads 1
“More one-on-one time with VRC,
so much knowledge and expertise is
here, and seeing a customer once a
month for as brief a time as possible
doesn’t give counselor nor
customer benefit that is deserved.”
Focus efforts on conducting pre-
employment assessments and writing
IPEs
2
“Providing more intensive
vocational assessment services;
having VRCs spend considerably
more time with customers in the
assessment phase.”
Improve the quality of service delivery
partner 3
“DVR pays CRPs good money to
provide services and often times
these services are of poor quality
and there is lack of follow through
on expectations.”
Conduct more aggressive community
and employer outreach campaigns 4
“Create working agreements with
employers; many employers are
very reluctant to work directly with
DVR as they really are uneducated
about people with disabilities and
the focus of DVR.”
Assess job readiness and provide
remediation 5
“Working on helping customers
identify what they will need to do to
get ready and stressing their need to
take responsibility for getting
ready.”
Improve staff morale 6
“Team work; supportive, flexible,
warm, friendly supervisors and
coworkers will go a long way to
help customers.”
Handle job development and placement
internally 7
“More in-house employment
development programs.” Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
Service Delivery Partner Survey
Methodology
Instrument. The instrument used for the electronic survey of DVR providers
(see Appendix J) was based on a modified version of the DVR customer survey. Like the
Washington DVR CSNA 54
DVR staff survey, it included questions concerning DVR customers’ employment-related
service needs and customer access to DVR services. The questionnaire also included a
set of questions specific to the needs of transition-age youth with disabilities and of DVR
customers who are members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity12
. As in the DVR
customer and staff surveys, providers were asked to give recommendations for improving
DVR services. The questionnaire included a few demographic questions for the purpose
of describing the sample group.
Participants. Individuals identified for participation in this survey included
representatives of organizations that provide services, coordinated services, or served in
an advocacy role for DVR customers. The CSNA Steering Committee identified 11
broad categories of providers, which included the following:
community rehabilitation providers;
assistive technology services;
food, clothing, and shelter services;
high school transition programs;
independent living services;
medical services;
mental health services;
post-secondary education programs;
private vocational training program;
WorkSource; and
12
Questions about the needs of DVR customers with the most significant disabilities were not included in
the provider survey. The designation of “most significant disability” is determined by several criteria and
is unique to the VR program. Therefore, service providers outside the VR agency may not be familiar with
this terminology.
Washington DVR CSNA 55
community and technical colleges.
Individuals within those organizations that provided direct services to DVR customers
and had a working knowledge of the DVR system were best suited to participate in the
survey.
Data collection. As with the DVR customer and staff surveys, data was gathered
from providers by means of an online questionnaire. However, unlike the customer and
staff surveys, DVR managed the recruitment of participants and the distribution of the
electronic survey. Recruitment of participants was effected by referral sampling. For
instance, the survey link was provided to a central administrator of an organization and
that person dispensed the link internally.
The survey of DVR providers was conducted from January 6th
, 2014 to January
27th
, 2014. Providers were sent an electronic invitation and link to the survey from the
DVR Assistant Director. Participation in the survey was voluntary, and individuals could
choose to opt out of future communications about the survey.
Confidentiality. Respondents to the provider survey were not asked to identify
themselves or their organizations by name on the questionnaire. In addition, responses
were aggregated by the researchers prior to reporting results. This served to further
obscure the identities of individual survey respondents.
Accessibility. Participants had the option of three formats for completing the
survey: online, by phone, or by mail. Accommodations could also be arranged by
contacting the researchers.
Data analysis. Data analysis consisted of computing frequencies and descriptive
statistics for the survey items with fixed response options. Open-ended survey questions,
Washington DVR CSNA 56
which yielded narrative responses from individuals, were analyzed by the researchers for
themes or concepts that were expressed consistently by respondents.
Completed surveys. A total of 335 online questionnaires were completed by
representatives of collateral service-provider agencies13
.
Results
Participant characteristics. Participants were asked to identify the type of
organization in which they worked from 11 choices:
community rehabilitation program;
assistive technology services;
basic food, clothing, and shelter services;
high school transition program;
independent living services;
medical services;
mental health services;
post-secondary education program;
Private vocational training program;
WorkSource; and
community and technical colleges.
Participants were also provided with an “other” response option. A response of “other”
required participants to provide further detail. Write-in responses were analyzed and
condensed into existing categories or sorted into new categories. Analysis of the “other”
responses produced a new category: Developmental Disabilities Administration. Of the
13
A response rate could not be calculated for the provider survey since the exact number of surveys that
were distributed internally by the organizations is unknown.
Washington DVR CSNA 57
335 respondents, most were from WorkSource (33%), followed by community
rehabilitation programs (20%), and the Developmental Disabilities Administration (15%).
Participants also indicated how many years they had been in their current positions. Most
of the participants had been in their current positions for one to five years (35%). Table
3.1 provides a summary of these participant characteristics.
Table 3.1
Sample Demographics
Demographic Percent of sample Number
Organization type
WorkSource 32 110
Community rehabilitation
program 20 68
Developmental Disabilities
Agency 15 51
Mental health services 11 37
Independent living services 5 15
Post-secondary education
program 4 13
Private vocational training
program 2 6
High school transition program 1 5
Community and technical
colleges 1 4
Years in position
Less than 1 year 13 42
1-5 years 35 118
6-10 years 19 64
11-15 years 11 37
More than 15 years 22 75 Note. Frequencies less than 1% are not reported for any response option.
Service needs general population. Participants were asked to identify the
services that were most needed by all DVR customers to reach their employment goals.
Participants could choose from a list of 30 services that were either provided by DVR in-
house or by service delivery partners. Participants were also provided with an “other”
Washington DVR CSNA 58
response. A response of “other” required participants to specify the service. Write-in
responses were analyzed and condensed into existing categories or sorted into new
categories.
Of the 336 responses, participants indicated that job placement (74.1%), job
coaching (69%), and job searching (66%) were the services most needed by DVR
customers to achieve their employment goals (see Table 3.2).
Table 3.2
Service Needs General Population
Service Percent of sample Number
Bachelor’s degree or above from a college or
university 6 20
Child care 20 66
Clothing 25 83
Community college or other vocational
training 42 140
Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment 20 66
Electronic and information technology (such
as screen readers or Braille) 17 57
Employer education about disability 44 149
Food 9 31
General work attitude and behavior 57 190
Housing 20 67
Interpreters 7 25
Job coaching 69 233
Job placement 74 249
Job searching 66 222
Keeping your job 60 200
Medical devices (such as hearing aids or
wheelchairs) 16 55
Medical diagnosis and treatment 16 53
Mental health counseling and treatment 36 121
Modifying your job or school environment
so that you can do your duties or tasks 38 129
Money management 16 53
On-the job training provided by your
employer 41 137
Personal care assistance 17 58
Preparing for work after high school 23 77
Washington DVR CSNA 59
Reading, writing, and math skills 20 66
Self-advocacy skills 40 59
Self care 37 125
Social security benefits planning 34 113
Transportation 46 155
Vocational guidance and counseling 56 189 Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
“Other” services included the following:
computer skills training
community-based assessments,
pre-vocational skill building,
a GED, and
student financial aid.
Service needs specific populations. Participants were then presented with a
series of questions about the service needs of specific populations of DVR customers that
included transition-age youth with disabilities and individuals with disabilities who are
members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity. In a two-part question, participants
were first asked if the services needed by that specific population to achieve their
employment goals differed from other DVR customers. If participants answered “yes,”
they were then asked to identify the services most needed by that population to achieve
their employment goals. Participants were provided with an “other” response. A
response of “other” required participants to specify the service. Write-in responses were
analyzed and condensed into existing categories or sorted into new categories.
Of the 335 responses, participants indicated that the service needs of transition-
age youth with disabilities were different from other DVR customers (46%). Service
providers indicated that job coaching (73%), general work attitude and behavior (69%),
Washington DVR CSNA 60
job placement (68%), and job searching (68%) were the services most needed by
transition-age youth to achieve their employment goals (see Table 3.3)
Table 3.3
Service Needs of Transition-age Youth
Service Percent of
sample Number
Bachelor’s degree or above from a college or
university 8 13
Child care 5 7
Clothing 14 21
Community college or other vocational training 42 64
Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment 16 24
Electronic and information technology (such as screen
readers or Braille) 12 18
Employer education about disability 28 43
Food 5 8
General work attitude and behavior 69 106
Housing 20 30
Interpreters 16 16
Job coaching 73 113
Job placement 68 105
Job searching 68 105
Keeping a job 64 99
Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs) 7 11
Medical diagnosis and treatment 15 23
Mental health counseling and treatment 24 37
Modifying your job or school environment so that you
can do your duties or tasks 35 54
Money management 34 53
On-the job training provided by your employer 42 64
Personal care assistance 14 21
Preparing for work after high school 62 96
Reading, writing, and math skills 30 46
Self-advocacy skills 47 72
Self care 23 36
Social security benefits planning 28 43
Transportation 47 72
Vocational guidance and counseling 51 78 Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
Washington DVR CSNA 61
In the open response category, participants indicated that a better coordination of services
between agencies would also assist transition-age youth to reach their employment goals.
Transition-age youth also need work experiences while in high school.
Service provision. Participants were first asked a closed-ended qualifying
question about whether they worked directly with DVR staff in providing services to
DVR customers. A “yes” response moved the respondents forward to the next set of
questions. Of the 336 total respondents, 190 (57%) indicated they worked with DVR
staff to provide services.
Access to DVR services general population. Participants were then asked 13
closed-ended (agree/disagree) questions about the challenges to accessing DVR services
experienced by all DVR customers. If participants endorsed that customers could not get
to a DVR office using public transportation, they were asked to specify the office
location. Additionally, if participants endorsed that customers could not get into a DVR
building/office, they were asked to specify the nature of the access issue and the location.
Participants were also provided with an “other” response option. A response of “other”
required participants to detail the barrier to DVR services. Write-in responses were
analyzed and condensed into existing categories or sorted into new categories.
The challenges to accessing DVR services most frequently cited by service
providers were that customers did not understand what services were available to them
(63%), they have waited a long time for DVR services (31%), customers disagreed with
their DVR counselors about the services they needed to get a job (24%), and they need
more time with their DVR counselors (24%) (see Table 3.4).
Washington DVR CSNA 62
Table 3.4
Access to DVR Services General Population
Access to DVR service Identified as a barrier
Percent of
sample Number
Getting to a DVR office using public
transportation 8 15
No DVR office in the area 7 14
Getting into a DVR building/office 1 2
Language barriers 4 7
Cultural barriers 7 14
Communication by email or phone from DVR
staff 14 27
Health issues prevent meetings with a DVR
counselor 12 23
Staff does not understand a customer’s disability 18 35
Customer does not understand what services
are available 63 120
Difficulties writing the Individualized Plan for
Employment 14 26
Waiting a long time for services 31 59
Disagreeing about services 24 45
Needing more time with a DVR counselor 24 45
“Other” challenges to accessing DVR services included the following:
the VR process is inefficient and/or burdensome for the customer,
a general breakdown in communication between the customer and the DVR
counselor, and
individuals are not ready for DVR services.
The specific DVR office locations that cannot be reached by customers using public
transportation appear in Appendix K.
Access to DVR services by specific populations. Participants were then asked
about the challenges to accessing DVR services by specific customer populations that
included transition-age youth with disabilities and individuals with disabilities who were
Washington DVR CSNA 63
members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity. In a two-part question, participants
were first asked if the difficulties accessing DVR services by that specific population
differed from other DVR customers. If participants answered “yes,” they were then
asked to identify the main reasons that the population had difficulties accessing DVR
services. However, a majority of service providers indicated that there were no
differences in access to DVR services by specific populations (43% and 53%
respectively).
Improvement to DVR services. In an open-ended question, participants were
asked what DVR could change to better support customers in achieving their employment
goals. Suggestions for improvement were provided by 242 participants. Write-in
responses were analyzed by constant comparison, and themes were extracted from the
responses. The frequency of responses was calculated, and the results are presented in
Table 3.5 in order of rank (see Appendix L for a complete list of responses to improving
DVR services).
Washington DVR CSNA 64
Table 3.5
Improvement to DVR Services
Thematic category Rank Characteristic response
Collaborate more effectively with
service delivery partners 1
“An improved and effective
operating system for agency-to-
agency communications regarding
shared customers.”
Improve the efficiency of the VR
process from intake to employment 2
“Clients stated they felt lost within
the system and frustrated.”
Provide vocational guidance and
counseling to DVR customers 3
“Provide clients with a realistic
pathway to their long-term
employment goals.”
Spend more time with DVR customers 4
“VRCs need to get to know the
client better and be more
understanding; some just pencil
whip the paperwork and skim over
reports.”
Explain the VR process and/or the
services available 5
“Provide more information to
clients regarding available services
from DVR.”
Conduct community outreach 6
“Inadequate outreach and lack of
transparency regarding information
on services available and
qualifications for services interferes
with access of many people who
qualify and would benefit from
DVR services.”
Contact DVR customers regularly 6
“Need to meet with clients more
quickly after application and
provide frequent (weekly) contact
and support even if just by phone.” Note. Frequencies less than 5% are not reported for any response option.
Key Informant Interviews
Methodology
Instrument. Key informant interviews were used to supplement the survey data.
After survey data were analyzed, gaps in knowledge were identified, and interview
questions were formulated. A semi-structured interview protocol (see Appendix M) was
developed to solicit information in four key areas:
Washington DVR CSNA 65
perceptions of employment barriers for people with disabilities in the State,
recommendations for addressing these barriers,
perceptions of the relationship between DVR and the partnering agency/organization
(if applicable), and
suggestions of model programs or evidence-based practices for improving
employment outcomes for people with disabilities.
The general format of the interview protocol was lead questions asked uniformly to all
participants followed by specific questions relevant to a particular person or topic. In
compliance with the Act, the protocol included a set of questions specific to the needs of
individuals with the most significant disabilities, transition-age youth with disabilities,
and individuals with disabilities who are also members of a diversity group by race or
ethnicity. The protocol also included a few demographic questions for the purpose of
describing the sample group of key informants.
Participants. The needs assessment steering committee identified individuals
who were perceived to have first-hand knowledge of the employment-related needs of
individuals with disabilities in the State. Key informants were experts on a wide range of
topics including but not limited to workforce development, mental health, post-secondary
education, veterans affairs, and independent living. Individuals that had current
relationships with DVR or a working knowledge of the DVR system were best suited to
participate in the interviews; however, individuals were not excluded from participation if
this criterion was not met.
Data collection. The Assistant Director of DVR facilitated contact between
approximately half of the key informants and the team at CCER. The Assistant Director
Washington DVR CSNA 66
contacted key informants by email, provided a brief explanation of the needs assessment
project, encouraged them to participate, and introduced the team at CCER. Once initial
contact was made with the key informants, telephone interviews were scheduled by the
researchers. Each key informant was contacted at least twice. Participation was
voluntary, and informants could opt out at any time. Key informant interviews were
conducted from April 21st, 2014 to May 16
th, 2014.
The general format of the interview was consistent among the variety of
informants. First, informants were asked questions to ascertain their personal and
professional expertise and their experience with DVR. Informants were then asked open-
ended questions about their perceptions of barriers to employment for persons with
disabilities. Finally, informants were asked to share their views on how DVR could
improve employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
Confidentiality. Participants were informed that their responses would be treated
as confidential information and would not be reported with information that could be
used to identify them. In addition, responses were aggregated by the researchers prior to
reporting results. This served to further obscure the identities of individual participants.
Accessibility. All interviews were conducted by phone; however,
accommodations could also be arranged by means of the researchers.
Data analysis. The interviewers took notes on the discussion as it occurred. The
notes were then transcribed, and each transcript was read thoroughly. Themes that
surfaced with consistency across interviews were identified and reported in the narrative.
Washington DVR CSNA 67
Completed interviews. A total of 24, 60-90 minute interviews were conducted
with individuals who are knowledgeable about the employment-related needs of people
with disabilities in the State.
Results
Participant characteristics. Key informants were individuals who had
professional and/or personal experience with disability services and the VR system. Key
informants were members of a variety of State agencies and organizations including the
following:
Department of Social and Health Services (various divisions),
post-secondary education,
medical service providers,
State Rehabilitation Council,
Department of Services for the Blind,
centers for independent living,
parent organizations,
WorkSource,
U.S. Department of Labor,
school districts,
Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board,
YMCAs,
legal advocacy organizations,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
research centers,
Washington DVR CSNA 68
Tribal VR Programs, and
Developmental Disabilities Council.
Participants identified their positions as parents, trainers, educators, researchers,
advocates, directors, program coordinators, and program analysts and served in these
roles an average of 15 years. Participants expressed varying degrees of personal and
professional contact with the VR system; however, all participants had, at a minimum, a
working knowledge of the purpose and intended outcomes of VR services.
Barriers to employment. Key informants were asked to describe what they
thought were the top three barriers to employment experienced by people with disabilities
in the State. Informants identified the following three barriers with the most frequency:
1. Employer attitudes and workplace culture. Whether it is a general lack of
exposure to people with disabilities, presumptions about the cost of hiring people
with disabilities, or fear of the ADA, informants stated that most employers are still
holding a gate-keeping role in regards to the employment of people with disabilities.
Many informants stated that the perspective of ableism in the work environment
needs to change and that employers should be held responsible for developing a
workplace culture around disability. However, since many public and private sector
employers do not have people with disabilities in leadership positions to enact
organizational change, the movement to change the workplace culture has to be
facilitated by an external party.
2. Transportation. Although we already know lack of transportation majorly impacts a
person’s access to employment and education, informants cited this as a primary
barrier to employment for people with disabilities. Some informants also commented
Washington DVR CSNA 69
on the connection between transportation and housing. They stated that individuals
with disabilities who move to rural areas for affordable housing often sacrifice their
access to public transportation.
3. Organizational or bureaucratic barriers. Several informants stated that there was
an overall lack of employment resources for people with disabilities in Washington.
According to informants, access for people with disabilities to needed employment-
related services is hampered by eligibility criteria based on strict definitions of
disability, which vary from one organization to the next. Further, informants
commented that many service systems, including DVR, are needlessly complex.
Other barriers to employment cited by key informants included low expectations of
people with disabilities, the current economy, access to workplace technology, affordable
housing, understanding when and how to disclose a disability to an employer, lack of
social skills to keep a job, work readiness, limited access to education and/or training
programs, providers’ lack of expertise in supported employment, lack of community
resources for assistance with self care, criminal histories, lack of knowledge regarding
transition from school to work, and limited options for self-employment.
Increasing employment of people with disabilities. Informants were asked
what they thought was the most important thing that could be done to increase the
employment of people with disabilities in Washington. Not surprisingly, informants
focused on employers. Beyond DVR improving their efforts at employer outreach,
informants suggested that a campaign launched by leadership in State government is
needed to send the message that employment of people with disabilities is a priority in
Washington. Governor Inslee has issued Executive Order 13-02 to improve the
Washington DVR CSNA 70
employment opportunities and outcomes for people with disabilities in State government.
According to the informants, this initiative should extend to employment in the private
sector. Additionally, informants remarked that employers’ passivity about hiring people
with disabilities needs to be challenged. Many informants believe that we need to change
the rhetoric about the employment of people with disabilities. In the words of one
informant, “it’s [employment] not a courtesy; it’s the law.”
Informants also expressed that the State should fund a transitional jobs strategy to
give people with disabilities a stepping-stone into work. Informants described this
strategy in terms of “earn and learn” training models, apprenticeship programs, and
subsidized employment. Informants explained that transitional work programs are a
promising strategy for individuals who are having difficulties finding work in the regular
labor market, especially in a period of high unemployment.
Informants stated that, as a society, we need to raise our expectations of
employment for people with disabilities. A deficit model of disability continues to
pervade many service organizations and contributes to a person’s self-limiting beliefs
about their capacities as employees. Informants discussed that we need to change the
dialogue about (dis)abilities and focus on an individual’s strengths and preferences.
Additionally, some informants commented that service providers of all types should be
empowering individuals with disabilities by instructing them of their civil rights and by
teaching them how to advocate for themselves in regards to employment.
Finally, informants emphasized that preparation for employment needs to start
early. Discussions about careers and employment pathways need to start at home and
continue in school. Several informants stated that many youth with disabilities exit
Washington DVR CSNA 71
school without any exposure to work and limited networks to tap into. We see how this
can restrict their options as adults.
Improvement to DVR services. As in the DVR customer, DVR staff, and
service provider surveys, key informants were asked what they thought was the most
important change DVR could make to better serve people with disabilities. A majority of
informants stated that there should be better collaboration among all of the stakeholders
in the VR process including the DVR customer, family members, DVR, service delivery
partners, and employers. In regards to the relationship between DVR and other service
providers, several informants stated that partnerships seem to be strong at the
administrative level but have varying degrees of success at the direct services level. For
instance, some informants stated that there was not a referral stream between DVR and
their organizations. For others, partnerships between the organizations seemed
perfunctory and did not extend beyond sitting on the same committees.
Equally important to the informants was quality VR services provided by
qualified personnel. Informants stated that DVR customers benefit from the expertise of
a rehabilitation counselor; yet, most VRCs seem to function more like service brokers
rather than counselors. Informants faulted the VR system, which does not permit VRCs
to focus on counseling and on building alliances with the customers. They went on to say
that the focus of the DVR organization seems to be on strict adherence to administrative
policies and procedures and not on individualized customer services. According to some
participants, this has resulted in institutionalized thinking and an inability of VR
counselors to be creative or “think outside the box.” Informants urged DVR to take steps
to restore VR counselors’ professional autonomy.
Washington DVR CSNA 72
Individuals with the most significant disabilities. Select informants were asked
to discuss the barriers to employment experienced by individuals whom DVR classifies
as having the most significant disabilities. Most agreed that although the barriers to
employment for this group may not be different from those that have already been
identified in the needs assessment, as a whole they may have a greater need for accessible
transportation, workplace accommodations, and long-term employment supports.
Informants focused on the employment of individuals with intellectual disabilities and the
relative success or failure of the Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA) and
DVR. Informants stated that although the partnership between DDA and DVR is strong
on an administrative level, there still seems to be a lot of “bouncing the customer back-
and-forth” between the VR counselor and the DD case resource manager. The addition
of a CRP for supported employment services makes this process even more confusing
and difficult to manage for the customers and their family members. Informants also
discussed the impact of DDA’s Working-Age Adult Policy on the employment of
individuals with intellectual disabilities in Washington. Although there have been
improvements in employment outcomes since the policy was implemented in 2006,
informants reported that both the labor force participation rate and the unemployment rate
of individuals with intellectual disabilities in Washington remains very low. Informants
concluded that the State has not committed to the employment of individuals with
complex disabilities. Informants stated that both DDA and DVR are underfunded and, as
a result, are not capable of serving all eligible individuals in Washington.
Individuals with disabilities from diversity groups. Informants were asked to
identify what they thought were the barriers to employment for individuals with
Washington DVR CSNA 73
disabilities who are members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity. Many of the
informants stated that the barriers experienced by diversity groups were generally the
same as those for all individuals with disabilities in Washington; however, informants
acknowledged that cultural perceptions of disability, language and literacy, and
trust/distrust of the government were related to the access of public services. In regards
to DVR services, most informants were not aware of any discrepancies between the
quality of services provided to individuals who are members of a diversity group and the
general population. However, they questioned whether DVR has the resources to address
the needs of every group and whether VR counselors have adequate training in
multicultural counseling.
Since the prevalence of disability for Native Americans/Alaskan Natives is higher
than for all other diversity groups by race or ethnicity in Washington, select informants
were asked to discuss their perceptions of the barriers to employment experienced by this
group. According to informants, the major barriers to employment experienced by
Native Americans/Alaskan Natives with disabilities are lack of transportation, lack of
affordable housing, criminal histories and/or histories of substance abuse, and racism.
Informants stated that for tribes in rural communities there are very poor transportation
options. Some of these communities have transportation to and from the area only twice
a week. Additionally, informants explained that there is not enough affordable housing,
and individuals often resign to “couch surfing for a night’s sleep.” Furthermore,
informants remarked that employment for individuals with a criminal history or a history
of substance abuse is especially difficult in a small community where “everyone may
know your past.” Finally, informants discussed that discrimination of Native
Washington DVR CSNA 74
Americans/Alaskan Natives by employers continues to be an issue especially in areas
proximal to reservations. Informants stated that these issues have been raised with tribal
leaders; however, power differentials amongst the tribes may hinder long-term solutions.
Informants knowledgeable about the Washington State Tribal VR Program
described some of the unique challenges to administering the Program as well as their
relationship with DVR. Informants stated that the Program has a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) with DVR. According to the informants, although the MOU
clearly identifies the roles and responsibilities of each agency, the requirements of the
MOU have not been clearly communicated by DVR administration to field staff.
Specifically, there have been instances where tribal members have been told that they
cannot be served by DVR and on separate occasions, DVR staff has not referred eligible
individuals to the Tribal VR Program. The informants expressed their desire for the two
agencies to work more collaboratively since DVR can pay for services that the Tribal VR
Program cannot cover and can offer customers more training opportunities.
Transition-age youth with disabilities. Informants knowledgeable about the
employment-related needs of transition-age youth with disabilities were asked to identify
what they thought were the barriers to employment for this group. Although many of the
informants stated that the barriers encountered by transition-age youth were similar to
those encountered by adults, some pointed out a few obvious differences such as young
adults’ attitudes about employment and their lack of preparedness for work. By and
large, informants focused the dialogue on the system issues that seem to impact a youth’s
successful transition from school to work. Informants underscored families’ frustrations
with the movement of their young adults from school to post-school activities including
Washington DVR CSNA 75
employment, post-secondary education, or vocational/adult education. According to
informants, many families do not understand the access points for DVR. Thus, there
needs to be greater clarity regarding when and how to access transition services.
Additionally, some informants expressed uncertainty regarding the designated DVR
counselor liaison for a particular school district. Although informants named school
districts with excellent transition programs and DVR relationships, they stated that the
quality of transition services was inconsistent across the State.
Recommendations for addressing these issues included anything that could be
done at a systems level to get more information and support to individuals working in the
field. Informants stated that VR counselors working with transition-age youth should be
required to have specialized training beyond what is offered in a rehabilitation counseling
education program. Although informants did not elaborate on the nature of this training,
they did remark that VR counselors could be more adept at career awareness and
exploration with transition-age youth. Additionally, when counselors are providing
vocational guidance to youth, they should consider the full range of possibilities
including employment, two-year career and technical education programs, and four-year
degree programs. Informants suggested changes to the VR process for this group. Many
stated that the VR process as conceptualized for adults is too rigid for young adults who
may not have an explicit vocational goal (which is typical for this age group regardless of
disability) and proposed that DVR allow for more flexibility in the VR process with this
group. Informants also proposed that VR counselor liaisons have reduced caseloads to
allow adequate time for collaboration with schools and participation in IEP meetings.
Washington DVR CSNA 76
Informants stated that DVR should not bear the responsibility for forging an
effective relationship between the agency and the school district, however. Informants
acknowledged that it can be difficult to get high school teachers on board with transition
services. There are many demands on teachers’ time, and they may not prioritize
transition planning. Thus, VR counselors might consider reaching out to high school
guidance counselors in addition to special education teachers. Ultimately, informants
acknowledged that DVR has been invested in transition services and lamented the lack of
resources at the State level to commit to each student.
Un-served or underserved populations. Key informant interviews were useful
in identifying populations that are un-served or underserved by DVR. Informants were
asked whether there were populations of people with disabilities in the State that were not
being served at a rate proportional to their numbers and needs. Informants identified
individuals with mental illness, veterans with disabilities, moderate to high-functioning
individuals with autism, and individuals aging with a disability. Targeted interviews
were then conducted with informants that had expertise in providing services to these
groups.
Individuals with mental illness. Informants discussed how current national
events have put a spotlight on the state of mental health services. Although the national
discussions have not been focused on employment services per se, informants
emphasized how important work can be for people’s treatment and recovery. Informants
stated that the primary barriers to employment for this group were the episodic nature of
the symptoms of mental illness, the stigma of mental illness, and co-occurring mental
illness and substance abuse disorders. Informants went on to say that individuals with
Washington DVR CSNA 77
mental illness suffer from the “soft bigotry of low expectations,” a pervasive theme
throughout the key informant interviews. According to informants, there needs to be an
investment in Washington mental health services including employment services.
Although DVR and the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery have worked
cooperatively serving individuals with mental illness for a number of years, informants
indicated that there is still tension between the agencies’ philosophies on readiness for
employment. Informants explained that the episodic nature of the symptoms of mental
illness do not fit into the schema of the traditional VR process. Informants said that DVR
should consider evidence-based practices such as the IPS model for supporting
individuals with mental illness in employment. Informants underscored that DVR should
not be the only employment resource for individuals with mental illness in Washington
and that other providers in the State need to share responsibility for employment
supports.
Individuals with autism. Informants knowledgeable about the employment-
related needs of individuals with autism detailed the barriers to employment experienced
by this group, which are not unlike those experienced by all individuals with disabilities.
However, informants stated that many individuals with autism who are physically and
intellectually capable of performing all the functions of a job are shut out of gainful
employment because they do not have the social skills to be successful on the job.
Additionally, informants emphasized that moderate to high-functioning individuals with
autism often fall between the cracks because they do not qualify for many State and
county programs that provide services and supports to individuals with disabilities, such
as DDA. Informants also stated that service providers such as DVR and community
Washington DVR CSNA 78
rehabilitation programs lack the expertise to support moderate to high-functioning adults
with autism in employment and recommended that VR counselors receive specialized
training on autism and models of support in the workplace for this group. Informants
also want resources directed towards further research on evidence-based employment
practices for adults with autism.
Veterans with disabilities. Informants with experience providing employment
services to veterans with disabilities identified the following barriers to employment for
this group: education or training that does not easily translate into civilian employment,
disability stigma and/or misinformation about veterans returning with a service-related
disability, and co-morbid mental health disorders that may or may not be rated.14
Considering Washington has one of the highest populations of veterans in the U.S.,
informants stated that there is a great demand by veterans with disabilities for
employment services. According to informants, there is little guidance provided to
veterans as they transition from active duty to civilian employment. Most veterans who
are eligible for vocational rehabilitation benefits are directed to use either Vocational
Rehabilitation & Employment (VR & E) from the Department of Veterans Affairs or the
Post-9/11 GI Bill. Since the compensation provided by the VA for service-related
disability is more extensive than what DVR can offer, informants said that it is unlikely
that a veteran would pursue DVR services. Additionally, informants described veterans’
services as a “tight and closed” system, which does not have a track record for
collaborating with DVR. Nonetheless, informants affirmed that since DVR and
14
A percentage rating represents the average impairment in earning capacity resulting from military
service-related diseases and injuries.
Washington DVR CSNA 79
VR & E share a similar mission, they should at the very least work together to educate
the public about disability.
Aging with a disability. Informants presented the employment landscape for
individuals aging with a disability. Informants stated that as people with disabilities age,
they leave the workforce 10 to 12 years earlier than those without a disability. Even
individuals who could have continued working with adequate accommodations, leave the
workforce early and enroll in Medicaid. Informants speculated but were uncertain what
coincides with these individuals leaving the workforce. Informants stated that the aging
process happens more quickly for individuals with disabilities. For example, the onset of
Alzheimer’s disease is around age 55 for individuals with intellectual disabilities and
some neurologic diseases. Additionally, individuals with disabilities may lose supports
as their family members age. Without an adequate support system, informants said that it
is difficult for many individuals with disabilities to sustain employment. In addition to
health factors, informants described system factors such as ageism and the disability trap
that impact an individual’s ability to work as they age.
Informants stated that the demographics of who works has been shifting, and they
anticipate that the gap in employment between people with and without disabilities will
widen especially for older adults. Informants believe that DVR is not prepared to support
older individuals with disabilities who want to work or to assist individuals in
transitioning out of the workforce. Informants relayed some of the experiences of older
adults with disabilities whom they had referred to DVR. These individuals expected
professional counseling to help them make decisions on whether they should continue to
work and felt that VR counselors did not listen to them, were driven by their
Washington DVR CSNA 80
understanding of a diagnosis, and were eager to refer them to CRPs. Informants were
clear that DVR must examine how their practices will help older workers with disabilities
to engage, retain, or transition out of employment.
Model programs and evidence-based practices. Participants were asked to
identify model programs or evidence-based practices that have been successful in
assisting individuals with disabilities in achieving employment. These are listed in
Appendix N along with a URL to the program website or descriptive document.
Washington DVR CSNA 81
References
Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S. (2013). Disability Statistics from the 2011
American Community Survey (ACS). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Employment and Disability Institute (EDI). Retrieved March 19, 2013 from
www.disabilitystatistics.org
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis
System (DANS), OMB #1820-0043: "Children with Disabilities Receiving
Special Education Under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act" 2011. Retrieved from https://www.ideadata.org/PartBChildCount.asp
U.S. Census Bureau, American FactFinder, “Selected Social Characteristics in the United
States 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.” Retrieved from
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid
=ACS_11_1YR_DP02&prodType=table
U.S. Census Bureau, American FactFinder, “Selected Population Profile in the United
States 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.” Retrieved from
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid
=ACS_11_1YR_S0201&prodType=table
U.S. Social Security Administration, Office of Retirement and Disability Policy, Office
of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics Annual Statistical Report on the Social
Security Disability Insurance Program, 2011. Retrieved from
http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2011/di_asr11.pdf
U.S. Social Security Administration Office of Retirement and Disability Policy, Office of
Washington DVR CSNA 82
Research, Evaluation, and Statistics SSI Recipients by State and County, 2011.
Retrieved from http://www.socialsecurity.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/ssi_sc/2011/
Washington DVR CSNA 83
Appendix A
Washington DVR Customer Survey
Thank you for participating in the DVR Customer Survey!
This survey will take about 10 minutes to complete. There are command buttons at the
end of each screen. "Next" will save your answers and move you forward. "Back" will
move you to the previous screen. "Submit" will turn in your completed survey.
You can exit an incomplete survey by closing your web browser. You can finish an
incomplete survey by using the same link provided in the email.
If you need assistance completing this survey or would prefer to take the survey either by
phone or by mail, please email or call Anne Ordway at the University of Washington:
ordwaa@uw.edu or (425) 774-8519.
There is a click box on the left of each response option. Please choose the best response
for each question. For "other" options, please type your response in the box provided.
1) Identify yourself from the choices below.*
( ) DVR customer
( ) Family member or guardian
( ) Personal care assistant
If you are a family member, guardian, or personal care assistant for the DVR customer,
please answer the survey questions from the perspective of the customer. This includes
the customer information, customer service needs, and access to DVR services.
2) What is your disability? (Check only one.)
( ) Amputation
( ) Arthritis
( ) Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
( ) Autism
( ) Behavioral/Mental Health
( ) Blindness
( ) Cerebral Palsy
( ) Cystic Fibrosis
( ) Deaf-Blind
( ) Deafness
Washington DVR CSNA 84
( ) Diabetes
( ) Drug/Alcohol Addiction
( ) Epilepsy
( ) Hard-of-Hearing
( ) Hemiplegia
( ) Intellectual/Developmental Disability
( ) Learning Disability
( ) Multiple Sclerosis
( ) Musculoskeletal Disorders
( ) Spinal Cord Impairment
( ) Stroke
( ) Traumatic Brain Injury
( ) Vision Impairment
( ) Other (Please specify.): _________________________________________________*
3) Do you have other disabilities? (Check all that apply.)
[ ] Amputation
[ ] Arthritis
[ ] Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
[ ] Autism
[ ] Behavioral/Mental Health
[ ] Blindness
[ ] Cerebral Palsy
[ ] Cystic Fibrosis
[ ] Deaf-Blind
[ ] Deafness
[ ] Diabetes
[ ] Drug/Alcohol Addiction
[ ] Epilepsy
[ ] Hard-of-Hearing
[ ] Hemiplegia
[ ] Intellectual/Developmental Disability
[ ] Learning Disability
Washington DVR CSNA 85
[ ] Multiple Sclerosis
[ ] Musculoskeletal Disorders
[ ] Spinal Cord Impairment
[ ] Stroke
[ ] Vision Impairment
[ ] Traumatic Brain Injury
[ ] Other (Please specify.): _________________________________________________*
4) What is your gender?
( ) Male
( ) Female
( ) Other (Please specify.): _________________________________________________*
5) What is your race or ethnicity? (Check all that apply.)
[ ] African American
[ ] Cambodian
[ ] Chinese
[ ] Filipino
[ ] Guamanian
[ ] Hawaiian
[ ] Hispanic
[ ] Japanese
[ ] Korean
[ ] Laotian
[ ] Native American
[ ] Other Asian or Pacific Islander
[ ] Samoan
[ ] Thai
[ ] Vietnamese
[ ] White/European American
[ ] Other (Please specify.): _________________________________________________*
Washington DVR CSNA 86
6) What is your age?
( ) 18-21
( ) 22-29
( ) 30-39
( ) 40-49
( ) 50-59
( ) 60-69
( ) 70 and over
7) In what county do you currently live?
( ) Adams
( ) Asotin
( ) Benton
( ) Chelan
( ) Clallam
( ) Clark
( ) Columbia
( ) Cowlitz
( ) Douglas
( ) Ferry
( ) Franklin
( ) Grant
( ) Grays Harbor
( ) Island
( ) Jefferson
( ) King
( ) Kitsap
( ) Kittitas
( ) Klickitat
( ) Lewis
( ) Lincoln
( ) Mason
Washington DVR CSNA 87
( ) Okanogan
( ) Pacific
( ) Pend Oreille
( ) Pierce
( ) San Juan
( ) Skagit
( ) Skamania
( ) Snohomish
( ) Spokane
( ) Stevens
( ) Thurston
( ) Wahkiakum
( ) Walla Walla
( ) Whatcom
( ) Whitman
( ) Yakima
( ) No longer living in Washington
8) Are you employed?
( ) Yes, full time (over 32 hours per week)
( ) Yes, part time (under 32 hours per week)
( ) No
9) Are you a current or former DVR customer?*
( ) Current customer
( ) Former customer
10) Below is a list of services that you may need to reach your employment goal. Please
choose all that apply to you.*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
Washington DVR CSNA 88
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping your job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying your job or school environment so that you can do your duties or tasks
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by your employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other: _________________________________________________*
11) Below is a list of services that you may have needed to reach your employment goal.
Please choose all that apply to you.*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
Washington DVR CSNA 89
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping your job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying your job or school environment so that you can do your duties or tasks
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by your employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other: _________________________________________________*
12) Below is a list of reasons why you may find it difficult to access DVR services. There
are two click boxes to the right of each statement. Please choose ONE answer for each
statement. "Agree" means it is a problem for you. "Disagree" means it is not a problem
for you.
Washington DVR CSNA 90
Agree Disagree
I cannot get to
the DVR
office using
public
transportation
( ) ( )
There is not a
DVR office in
my area
( ) ( )
I cannot get
into the DVR
building/office
( ) ( )
DVR staff do
not understand
my language
( ) ( )
DVR staff do
not understand
my culture
( ) ( )
DVR staff do
not call/email
me back
( ) ( )
Health
problems keep
me from
meeting with
my DVR
counselor
( ) ( )
DVR staff do
not understand
my disability
( ) ( )
I do not
understand
what DVR
services are
( ) ( )
Washington DVR CSNA 91
available to
me
Writing my
employment
plan is
difficult
( ) ( )
I have waited
a long time for
DVR services
( ) ( )
My DVR
counselor and
I disagree
about the
services I need
to get a job
( ) ( )
I need more
time with my
DVR
counselor
( ) ( )
Other (Please specify.):
_________________________________________________
13) Below is a list of reasons why you may have found it difficult to access DVR
services. There are two click boxes to the right of each statement. Please choose ONE
answer for each statement. "Agree" means it was a problem for you. "Disagree" means it
was not a problem for you.
Agree Disagree
I could not get
to the DVR
office using
public
transportation
( ) ( )
There was not
a DVR office
( ) ( )
Washington DVR CSNA 92
in my area
I could not get
into the DVR
building/office
( ) ( )
DVR staff did
not understand
my language
( ) ( )
DVR staff did
not understand
my culture
( ) ( )
DVR staff did
not call/email
me back
( ) ( )
Health
problems kept
me from
meeting with
my DVR
counselor
( ) ( )
DVR staff did
not understand
my disability
( ) ( )
I did not
understand
what DVR
services were
available to
me
( ) ( )
Writing my
employment
plan was
difficult
( ) ( )
I waited a
long time for
DVR services
( ) ( )
Washington DVR CSNA 93
My DVR
counselor and
I disagreed
about the
services I need
to get a job
( ) ( )
I needed more
time with my
DVR
counselor
( ) ( )
Other (Please specify.):
_________________________________________________
14) What could DVR change to improve their services?
Thank you for taking our survey. Your response is very important to us.
Washington DVR CSNA 94
Appendix B
Table B1
Race/Ethnicity of Customer Survey Participants
Race/Ethnicity Percent of sample Number
African American 8 116
Afro-Caribbean .06 1
Brazilian .06 1
British West Indian .06 1
Canadian Indian .06 1
Cambodian .2 3
Chinese .8 13
Creole .06 1
Cuban .06 1
Dominican .06 1
Eskimo .06 1
Filipino 1.4 22
Guamanian .2 3
Haitian .06 1
Hawaiian .1 2
Hispanic 4 64
Indian/North Indian .1 2
Jamaican .06 1
Japanese .8 13
Korean .3 5
Laotian .1 2
Mix Race .6 9
Native American 6 87
Other Asian or Pacific Islander 2 24
Samoan .1 2
Thai - -
Vietnamese .6 10
White/European American 85 1,310
Washington DVR CSNA 95
Appendix C
Table C1
County of Residence of Customer Survey Participants
County Percent of sample Number
Adams .1 1
Asotin .5 8
Benton 1 17
Chelan .7 11
Clallam 1 21
Clark 7 104
Columbia - -
Cowlitz 1 22
Douglas .4 6
Ferry - -
Franklin .2 3
Grant .4 6
Grays Harbor .7 10
Island .9 14
Jefferson .3 5
King 32 504
Kitsap 4 58
Kittitas .1 2
Klickitat .1 1
Lewis 1 16
Lincoln .1 2
Mason .7 11
Okanogan .7 11
Pacific .3 5
Pend Oreille .1 2
Pierce 9 137
San Juan - -
Skagit 3 41
Skamania .2 3
Snohomish 10 160
Spokane 6 98
Stevens .5 7
Thurston 6 97
Wahkiakum .1 1
Walla Walla .6 9
Whatcom 6 87
Whitman .8 12
Yakima 2 26
No longer living in Washington 2 34
Washington DVR CSNA 96
Appendix D
Table D1
Primary Disability of Customer Survey Participants
Disability Percent of Sample Number
Behavioral/Mental Health 21 320
Musculoskeletal Disorders 9 135
Hard-of-Hearing 7 100
Learning Disability 7 110
Intellectual/Developmental Disability 6 98
Multiple Disabilities 6 98
Amputation 5 15
Autism Spectrum Disorder 5 77
Spinal Cord Impairment 5 69
Deafness 5 83
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder 4 58
Traumatic Brain Injury 4 67
Arthritis 3 50
Other Neurological 2 34
Diabetes 2 26
Epilepsy 2 24
Cerebral Palsy 2 23
Multiple Sclerosis 2 23
Drug/Alcohol Addiction 1 21
Stroke 1 16
Vision Impairment .8 13
Immune/Autoimmune Disorder .8 12
Cardiovascular Disease .8 12
Gastrointestinal Disorder .5 8
Blindness .5 7
Pulmonary Disorder .5 7
Fibromyalgia .5 7
Cancer .4 5
Renal Disorder .4 6
Speech .3 5
Deaf-Blind .3 4
Obesity .2 3
Chronic Pain .1 2
Lyme Disease .06 1
Lymphedema .06 1
Dermatological Disorder .06 1
Mitochondrial Disease .06 1
Hemiplegia - -
Cystic Fibrosis - -
Washington DVR CSNA 97
Appendix E
Table E1
Secondary Disabilities of Customer Survey Participants
Disability Percent of Sample Number
Behavioral/Mental Health 28 330
Learning Disability 21 250
Arthritis 19 225
Musculoskeletal Disorders 13 151
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder 11 134
Drug/Alcohol Addiction 11 128
Hard-of-Hearing 10 121
Vision Impairment 7 85
Intellectual/Developmental Disability 6 71
Spinal Cord Impairment 5 56
Traumatic Brain Injury 4 51
Autism Spectrum Disorder 4 47
Diabetes 4 43
Other Neurological 3 46
Multiple Disabilities 3 39
Epilepsy 3 30
Stroke 2 26
Cerebral Palsy 2 18
Cardiovascular Disease 1 12
Multiple Sclerosis .9 11
Amputation .8 10
Speech .8 9
Gastrointestinal Disorder .7 8
Pulmonary Disorder .5 6
Immune/Autoimmune Disease .5 6
Fibromyalgia .5 6
Obesity .4 5
Blindness .3 4
Chronic Pain .3 4
Deaf-Blind .3 3
Hemiplegia .3 3
Cancer .3 3
Endocrine Disorder .2 2
Cystic Fibrosis - -
Washington DVR CSNA 98
Appendix F
Table F1
Customer Recommendations to Improve DVR Services
Change Percent of
Sample Number
Improve the VR process 17 122
Improve the quality of VR counselor’s case
management skills 15 109
Improve the quality of VR counselors’ counseling
skills 10 72
Provide a comprehensive explanation of the VR
process and/or the services available 9 66
Allow more time with the VR counselor 5 32
Improve vendor services 4 30
Provide more job development services 4 25
Increase the DVR budget 2 14
Support two-four year college degrees 2 14
Support self-employment as an outcome 2 11
Provide for customers’ basic needs (food, clothing,
housing) 1 9
Assist with pre-vocational skill building 1 9
Conduct more pre-employment assessments 1 7
Provide more job placement services 1 7
Update the communication technology at DVR 1 7
Arrange on-the-job training with employers .8 6
Reimburse transportation costs .8 6
Match the DVR customer and counselor instead of
random assignment .8 6
Provide post-employment services/long-term
supports .7 5
Expand DVR office locations .7 5
Provide tools for work/school .6 4
Address ageism in the workplace .4 3
Assist with job searching .4 3
Improve the voucher system .4 3
Assist customers with self-advocacy .4 3
Meet customers in their homes/teleconference .4 3
Educate employers about disability .4 3
Conduct community outreach .4 3
Provide language interpreters during meetings .4 3
Tailor services for “high functioning” customers .4 3
Improve the WOWI assessment .4 3
Improve coordination of agency services .4 3
Washington DVR CSNA 99
Provide remedial education .3 2
Cover dental procedures .3 2
Cover physical therapy .3 2
Improve counselors’ multicultural competencies .3 2
Cover medical prescriptions .1 1
Educate employers about medical marijuana .1 1
Improve the customer service of clerical staff .1 1
Guide customers on discussing a criminal history .1 1
Ensure that each DVR office operates under the
same policies/procedures .1 1
Provide a peer-support specialist .1 1
Maintain an updated list of job openings .1 1
Provide instruction on managing personal finances .1 1
Provide Social Security benefits counseling .1 1
Washington DVR CSNA 100
Appendix G
Washington DVR Staff Survey
Thank you for participating in the DVR Staff Survey!
This survey will take about 15 minutes to complete. There are command buttons at the
end of each screen. "Next" will save your answers and move you forward. "Back" will
move you to the previous screen. "Submit" will turn in your completed survey.
You can exit an incomplete survey by closing your web browser. You can finish an
incomplete survey by using the same link provided in the email.
If you need assistance completing this survey or would prefer to take the survey either by
phone or by mail, please email or call Anne Ordway at the University of Washington:
ordwaa@uw.edu or (425) 774-8519.
DVR Staff Information
What is your job title?
( ) Rehabilitation Technician
( ) Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor
( ) Vocational Rehabilitation Supervisor
( ) Area Manager
What DVR area do you serve?
( ) Area 1
( ) Area 2
( ) Area 3
How many years have you been in your current position?
( ) Less than 1 year
( ) 1-5 years
( ) 6-10 years
( ) 11-15 years
( ) More than 15 years
Washington DVR CSNA 101
Customer Service Needs
Instructions: Please answer the questions below from YOUR EXPERIENCE working
with DVR customers. There will be questions about specific DVR populations. If you do
not have experience working with that population, please select, "Don't know" for that
question. In this survey, we use the term "most significant disability" as it is defined in
STARS. "Transition-age youth" are DVR customers 22 years and under.
Which of the following services are most needed by DVR customers to achieve their
employment goals?*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping a job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying a job or school environment so that a client can do his/her duties or tasks
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by the employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
Washington DVR CSNA 102
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR customers with the most significant disabilities, do the services
needed to achieve their employment goals differ from other DVR customers?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
Which of the following services are most needed by DVR customers with the most
significant disabilities to achieve their employment goals?*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping a job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying a job or school environment so that a client can do his/her duties or tasks
Washington DVR CSNA 103
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by the employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR customers who are transition-age youth, do the services needed to
achieve their employment goals differ from other DVR customers?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
Which of the following services are most needed by transition-age youth to achieve their
employment goals?*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
Washington DVR CSNA 104
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping a job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying a job or school environment so that a client can do his/her duties or tasks
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by the employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR customers who are members of a diversity group by race or
ethnicity, do the services needed to achieve their employment goals differ from other
DVR customers?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
Which of the following services are most needed by individuals who are members of a
diversity group by race or ethnicity to achieve their employment goals?*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
Washington DVR CSNA 105
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping a job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying a job or school environment so that a client can do his/her duties or tasks
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by the employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Access to DVR Services
What are the main reasons that customers might find it difficult to access DVR services?
(Select up to three responses.)*
[ ] They cannot get to the DVR office using public transportation
[ ] There is not a DVR office in their area
[ ] They cannot get into the DVR building/office
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their language
Washington DVR CSNA 106
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their culture
[ ] DVR staff does not call them back
[ ] Health problems keep them from meeting with their DVR counselor
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their disability
[ ] They do not understand what DVR services are available to them
[ ] Writing their employment plan is difficult
[ ] They have waited a long time for DVR services
[ ] They disagree with their DVR counselor about the services they need to get a job
[ ] They need more time with their DVR counselor
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Please specify the location of the DVR office customers cannot reach using public
transportation.*
Please specify the location of the DVR office and the nature of the access issue.*
Considering only DVR customers with the most significant disabilities, do the difficulties
accessing DVR services differ from those experienced by other DVR customers?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
What are the main reasons that DVR customers with the most significant disabilities
might find it difficult to access DVR services? (Select up to three responses.)*
[ ] They cannot get to the DVR office using public transportation
[ ] There is not a DVR office in their area
[ ] They cannot get into the DVR building/office
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their language
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their culture
[ ] DVR staff does not call them back
[ ] Health problems keep them from meeting with their DVR counselor
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their disability
[ ] They do not understand what DVR services are available to them
[ ] Writing their employment plan is difficult
[ ] They have waited a long time for DVR services
Washington DVR CSNA 107
[ ] They disagree with their DVR counselor about the services they need to get a job
[ ] They need more time with their DVR counselor
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR customers who are transition-age youth, do the difficulties
accessing DVR services differ from those experienced by other DVR customers?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
What are the main reasons that DVR customers who are transition-age youth might find it
difficult to access DVR services? (Select up to three responses.)*
[ ] They cannot get to the DVR office using public transportation
[ ] There is not a DVR office in their area
[ ] They cannot get into the DVR building/office
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their language
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their culture
[ ] DVR staff does not call them back
[ ] Health problems keep them from meeting with their DVR counselor
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their disability
[ ] They do not understand what DVR services are available to them
[ ] Writing their employment plan is difficult
[ ] They have waited a long time for DVR services
[ ] They disagree with their DVR counselor about the services they need to get a job
[ ] They need more time with their DVR counselor
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR customers who are members of a diversity group by race or
ethnicity, do the difficulties accessing DVR services differ from those experienced by
other DVR customers?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
Washington DVR CSNA 108
What are the main reasons that DVR customers who are members of a diversity group by
race or ethnicity might find it difficult to access DVR services? (Select up to three
responses.)*
[ ] They cannot get to the DVR office using public transportation
[ ] There is not a DVR office in their area
[ ] They cannot get into the DVR building/office
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their language
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their culture
[ ] DVR staff does not call them back
[ ] Health problems keep them from meeting with their DVR counselor
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their disability
[ ] They do not understand what DVR services are available to them
[ ] Writing their employment plan is difficult
[ ] They have waited a long time for DVR services
[ ] They disagree with their DVR counselor about the services they need to get a job
[ ] They need more time with their DVR counselor
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
DVR Service Providers
Instructions: DVR buys services or obtains comparable services and benefits for
customers from a variety of other programs. Please answer the questions below from
YOUR EXPERIENCE working with DVR customers and indicate whether you believe
there are adequate services to meet their vocational rehabilitation needs. If you do not
have experience working with a particular type of service provider, please select "Don't
know" for that question.
Community Rehabilitation Programs*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Community Rehabilitation Programs do not adequately
meet customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
Washington DVR CSNA 109
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Independent Living Providers*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Independent Living Providers do not adequately meet
customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Assistive Technology Providers*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Assistive Technology Providers do not adequately meet
customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
Washington DVR CSNA 110
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Medical Providers (excluding Mental Health Providers)*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Medical Providers (excluding Mental Health Providers) do
not adequately meet customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Mental Health Providers*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Mental Health Providers do not adequately meet customer
needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Post-Secondary Education Programs*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
Washington DVR CSNA 111
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Post-Secondary Education Programs do not adequately
meet customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Private Vocational Training Programs*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Private Vocational Training Programs do not adequately
meet customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Community and Technical Colleges*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel Community and Technical Colleges do not adequately
meet customer needs?*
Washington DVR CSNA 112
( ) Poorly trained staff
( ) Inexperienced staff
( ) Too few staff
( ) Services take too long to provide
( ) Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
( ) Not enough providers to serve customers
( ) Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
WorkSource*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel WorkSource does not adequately meet customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
High School Transition Programs*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel High School Transition Programs do not adequately meet
customer needs?*
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
Washington DVR CSNA 113
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Programs that support Basic Food, Shelter, & Clothing*
( ) Adequately meet customer needs
( ) Do not adequately meet customer needs
( ) Don't know
What are the reasons you feel programs that support Basic Food, Shelter, & Clothing do
not adequately meet customer needs?
[ ] Poorly trained staff
[ ] Inexperienced staff
[ ] Too few staff
[ ] Services take too long to provide
[ ] Do not provide effective reasonable accommodations
[ ] Not enough providers to serve customers
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Change to DVR Services
What is the most important change that DVR could make to better support customers in
achieving their employment goals?
From your perspective, what is the primary customer need that DVR is not meeting?
Thank You!
Thank you for taking our survey. Your response is very important to us.
Washington DVR CSNA 114
Appendix H
Table H1
DVR Office Locations not Accessible by Public Transportation from DVR Staff Survey
Location Count Rural customers 6 Colfax/Pullman itinerate offices and Clarkston
2
Mt. Vernon 2 Puyallup 2 Arlington 1 Bellingham 1 Deer Park 1 Kennewick 1 Lower Valley 1 Mercer 1 Neah Bay 1 Omak (from Twisp) 1 Plain 1 Seabeck and outlying areas of Kitsap County
1
Spokane 1 Wapato/Ellensburg 1 Yacolt 1 Area 3 1 Olympic Peninsula 1
Washington DVR CSNA 115
Appendix I
Table I1
DVR Staff Recommendations to Improve DVR Services
Change Percent of
Sample Number
Hire more staff/decrease VRC caseloads 19 22
Enable VRCs to have more time to conduct pre-
employment assessments and to write IPEs 10 12
Improve the quality of service delivery partners 8 9
Conduct more aggressive community and employer
outreach campaigns 8 9
Assess job readiness and provide remediation 7 8
Improve staff morale 6 7
Handle job development and placement internally 5 6
Explain to customers the VR process and what
services may be available to meet their needs 4 5
Concentrate efforts on rehabilitation counseling
rather than job placement 3 4
Collaborate/coordinate services with more agencies 3 4
DVR should assist customers with their basic needs
(food, clothing, housing) 3 4
Hold customers accountable for moving their cases
forward 3 3
Increase/improve services to rural areas 3 3
Make VR services more accessible 3 3
Streamline paperwork (i.e., IPE) 2 2
Improve resources for customers with a criminal
background 2 2
Provide benefits planning to more customers 2 2
Offer weekend appointments with customers to
accommodate their schedules .8 1
Work with customers on self-advocacy skills .8 1
Improve public transportation services .8 1
Improve the voucher system .8 1
Discontinue allotments .8 1
Provide an in-service training on working with
customers with a mental health diagnosis .8 1
Reduce customer wait time for services .8 1
Provide in-house, online customer assessment .8 1
Offer customers training in assistive technology .8 1
Encourage on the job training by employers .8 1
Restructure DVR management .8 1
Reorganize DVR so that it no longer is under DSHS .8 1
Washington DVR CSNA 117
Appendix J
Washington DVR Service Provider Survey
Thank you for participating in the DVR Service Provider Survey!
This survey will take about 15 minutes to complete. There are command buttons at the
end of each screen. "Next" will save your answers and move you forward. "Back" will
move you to the previous screen. "Submit" will turn in your completed survey.
You can exit an incomplete survey by closing your web browser. You can finish an
incomplete survey by using the same link provided in the email.
If you need assistance completing this survey or would prefer to take the survey either by
phone or by mail, please email or call Anne Ordway at the University of Washington:
ordwaa@uw.edu or (425) 774-8519.
Service Provider Information
In what type of organization do you currently work?
( ) Community rehabilitation program
( ) Assistive technology services
( ) Basic food, clothing, and shelter services
( ) High school transition program
( ) Independent living services
( ) Medical services
( ) Mental health services
( ) Post-secondary education program
( ) Private vocational training program
( ) WorkSource
( ) Community and technical colleges
( ) Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
What is your job title?
_________________________________________________
Washington DVR CSNA 118
How many years have you been in your current position?
( ) Less than 1 year
( ) 1-5 years
( ) 6-10 years
( ) 11-15 years
( ) More than 15 years
DVR Client Service Needs
Instructions: Please answer the questions below from YOUR EXPERIENCE working
with DVR clients. There will be some questions about specific DVR populations. If you
do not have experience working with that population, please select "Don't Know" for that
question. "Transition-age youth" are DVR clients 22 years and under.
Which of the following services are most needed by DVR clients to achieve their
employment goals?*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping a job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying a job or school environment so that a client can do his/her duties or tasks
Washington DVR CSNA 119
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by the employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR clients who are transition-age youth, do the services needed to
achieve their employment goals differ from other DVR clients?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
Which of the following services are most needed by transition-age youth to achieve their
employment goals?*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
Washington DVR CSNA 120
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping a job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying a job or school environment so that a client can do his/her duties or tasks
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by the employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR clients who are members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity,
do the services needed to achieve their employment goals differ from other DVR
clients?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
Which of the following services are most needed by individuals who are members of a
diversity group by race or ethnicity to achieve their employment goals?*
[ ] Bachelor's degree or above from a college or university
[ ] Child care
[ ] Clothing
[ ] Community college or other vocational training
[ ] Drug/alcohol counseling and treatment
[ ] Electronic and information technology (such as screen readers or Braille)
Washington DVR CSNA 121
[ ] Employer education about disability
[ ] Food
[ ] General work attitude and behavior
[ ] Housing
[ ] Interpreters
[ ] Job coaching
[ ] Job placement
[ ] Job searching
[ ] Keeping a job
[ ] Medical devices (such as hearing aids or wheelchairs)
[ ] Medical diagnosis and treatment
[ ] Mental health counseling and treatment
[ ] Modifying a job or school environment so that a client can do his/her duties or tasks
[ ] Money management
[ ] On-the-job training provided by the employer
[ ] Personal care assistance
[ ] Preparing for work after high school
[ ] Readers
[ ] Reading, writing, and math skills
[ ] Self-advocacy skills
[ ] Self care
[ ] Social security benefits planning
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Vocational guidance and counseling
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Access to DVR Services
Do you work directly with DVR staff in providing services to DVR clients?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
Washington DVR CSNA 122
What are the main reasons that DVR clients might find it difficult to access DVR
services? (Select up to three responses.)*
[ ] They cannot get to the DVR office using public transportation
[ ] There is not a DVR office in their area
[ ] They cannot get into the DVR building/office
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their language
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their culture
[ ] DVR staff does not call them back
[ ] Health problems keep them from meeting with their DVR counselor
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their disability
[ ] They do not understand what DVR services are available to them
[ ] Writing their employment plan is difficult
[ ] They have waited a long time for DVR services
[ ] They disagree with their DVR counselor about the services they need to get a job
[ ] They need more time with their DVR counselor
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Please specify the location of the DVR office clients cannot access by public
transportation.*
_________________________________________________
Please specify the location of the DVR office and the nature of the access issue.*
_________________________________________________
Considering only DVR clients who are transition-age youth, do the difficulties accessing
DVR services differ from those experienced by other DVR clients?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
What are the main reasons that DVR clients who are transition-age youth might find it
difficult to access DVR services? (Select up to three responses.)*
[ ] They cannot get to the DVR office using public transportation
[ ] There is not a DVR office in their area
Washington DVR CSNA 123
[ ] They cannot get into the DVR building/office
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their language
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their culture
[ ] DVR staff does not call them back
[ ] Health problems keep them from meeting with their DVR counselor
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their disability
[ ] They do not understand what DVR services are available to them
[ ] Writing their employment plan is difficult
[ ] They have waited a long time for DVR services
[ ] They disagree with their DVR counselor about the services they need to get a job
[ ] They need more time with their DVR counselor
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Considering only DVR clients who are members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity,
do the difficulties accessing DVR services differ from those experienced by other DVR
clients?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Don't know
What are the main reasons that DVR clients who are members of a diversity group by
race or ethnicity might find it difficult to access DVR services? (Select up to three
responses.)*
[ ] They cannot get to the DVR office using public transportation
[ ] There is not a DVR office in their area
[ ] They cannot get into the DVR building/office
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their language
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their culture
[ ] DVR staff does not call them back
[ ] Health problems keep them from meeting with their DVR counselor
[ ] DVR staff does not understand their disability
[ ] They do not understand what DVR services are available to them
[ ] Writing their employment plan is difficult
[ ] They have waited a long time for DVR services
Washington DVR CSNA 124
[ ] They disagree with their DVR counselor about the services they need to get a job
[ ] They need more time with their DVR counselor
[ ] Other (Please specify): _________________________________________________*
Change to DVR Services
What is the most important change that DVR could make to better support clients in
achieving their employment goals?
Considering DVR's mission of employment of people with disabilities, what client need
is DVR not meeting?
Thank You!
Thank you for taking our survey. Your response is very important to us.
Washington DVR CSNA 125
Appendix K
Table K1
DVR Office Locations not Accessible by Public Transportation from Provider Survey
Location Count SeaTac 3 Wenatchee 2 Omak 1 Pacific-Grays Harbors 1 Grant-Adams 1 Kent 1 Ellensburg 1 Ferry-PO Counties 1
Washington DVR CSNA 126
Appendix L
Table L1
Provider Recommendations to Improve DVR Services
Change Percent of
Sample Number
Collaborate more effectively with service delivery
partners 19 46
Improve the efficiency of the VR process from
intake to employment 16 38
Provide vocational guidance and counseling to DVR
customers 10 25
Spend more time with DVR customers 7 17
Explain the VR process and/or the services available 7 16
Conduct community outreach 6 15
Contact DVR customers regularly 6 15
Increase job development activities 4 10
Support the self-determination of the customers 4 9
Stop “screening out” individuals that could benefit
from DVR services 3 7
Improve transition services 2 6
Improve services to individuals with mental illness 2 6
Improve services to individuals with developmental
disabilities 1 3
Improve services to individuals with Autism 1 3
Provide for customers’ basic needs 1 3
Ensure that each DVR office operates under the
same policies/procedures 1 3
Support pre-vocational testing and community-based
assessments 1 3
Adjust the DVR fee structure for provider services to
reflect market value 3
Assist customers with life skills 1 3
Provide more job placement services .8 2
Educate employers about disability .8 2
Assist customers with self-advocacy skills .8 2
Provide Social Security benefits counseling .8 2
Improve access to DVR offices via public
transportation .8 2
Meet the needs of rural communities .8 2
Prevent DVR counselor turnover .8 2
Support two/four year degrees .4 1
Reimburse childcare for customers .4 1
Reimburse interview clothing .4 1
Washington DVR CSNA 127
Assist customers in developing social networks .4 1
Understand the local labor market .4 1
Extend employment plans when necessary .4 1
Offer flexible service hours (evenings or weekends) .4 1
Offer paid trial work experiences .4 1
Provide customers with computer skill training .4 1
Provide AT to customers .4 1
Do not make abstinence mandatory for services .4 1
Train DVR counselors on the ADA/FMLA .4 1
Enforce policies regarding a customer’s release of
information .4 1
Limit the authority of a counselor’s supervisor in a
customer’s IPE .4 1
Improve services to customers with a criminal
background .4 1
Understand the needs of customers who are
homeless .4 1
Understand basic accommodations for school/work .4 1
Washington DVR CSNA 128
Appendix M
Key Informant Interview Guide
Respondent Name:____________________________________________________
Respondent Organization:______________________________________________
Date of Interview:_____________________________________________________
Interviewer Name:_____________________________________________________
Stakeholder Type(s):_____________________________________________________
Introduction
My name is [Your Name] and I am the [Your Title] for the Center for Continuing Education in Rehabilitation at the University of Washington. I am working cooperatively with the Washington Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) and the State Rehabilitation Council to identify the unmet vocational rehabilitation needs of individuals with disabilities who live in the state of Washington. We are asking you to participate in a telephone interview about the vocational rehabilitation needs of individuals with disabilities in the state. The results will be used by DVR to develop their state plan for providing rehabilitation services. The interview will consist of questions that ask you to share your perceptions of the unmet needs of individuals with disabilities in this state. You will be asked to share your impressions of the barriers to employment faced by persons with disabilities as well as your thoughts about how DVR could help improve employment for persons with disabilities.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you decide to participate, your responses will be anonymous—that is, recorded without any identifying information that is linked to you. If you have any questions regarding this study, please contact me at [Your Number]. You may also contact Don Kay, Assistant Director of DSHS Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, with questions or concerns related to this study.
I would like to ask you some questions about your perception of the employment barriers
for persons with disabilities and about what you think DVR can do to improve the
employment of job seekers with disabilities.
First, I’d like to ask you a little about your experience providing services to people
with disabilities.
1. Please describe your position and role at this organization.
How long have you worked in this capacity?
2. Please tell me about the services your organization provides to people with
disabilities.
Does your organization provide services to a specific population and if so, what
population?
Does your organization provide employment-related services to people with
disabilities and if so, what type of services does your organization provide?
Washington DVR CSNA 129
3. Are you aware of model programs or evidence-based practices that help
individuals with disabilities successfully achieve employment? If so, please
describe the model programs or evidence-based practices.
Now, I’d like to ask you about your perception of employment for persons with
disabilities.
4. What do you think are the top three barriers to employment encountered by
people with disabilities?
5. What are your recommendations for addressing these barriers?
6. Ask as necessary, according to stakeholder category: In comparison to all people
with disabilities, do you think the barriers are any different for people with
significant disabilities? If so, what are the differences?
7. Ask as necessary, according to stakeholder category: In comparison to all people
with disabilities, do you think the barriers are any different for people with
disabilities who are members of a diversity group by race or ethnicity? If so, what
are the differences?
8. Ask as necessary, according to stakeholder category: In comparison to all people
with disabilities, do you think the barriers are any different for youth with
disabilities in transition from high school? If so, what are the differences?
9. What is the most important thing that can be done to increase the employment of
individuals with disabilities?
Now, I’d like to ask you about your experience with DVR and your thoughts on how
DVR could help improve employment for persons with disabilities.
10. Please tell me about your experience working with DVR.
Does your organization regularly work with DVR?
Do you refer clients to DVR, or does DVR refer clients to you?
What types of services are provided to the client?
11. How well does DVR partner with your organization when serving persons with
disabilities? What could be done to improve this partnership?
12. What could DVR do to better help people with disabilities prepare for and meet
employer expectations for new workers?
13. What specific supports and services could DVR provide that would help people
with disabilities retain their positions?
Washington DVR CSNA 130
14. Are there any individuals with disabilities who have difficulty accessing DVR
services? If so, why?
Possible barriers include but are not limited to location of office, cultural
barriers, language barriers, accessibility barriers, takes too long to obtain
services.
15. From your perspective, what could DVR do to eliminate these barriers?
16. Are there any individuals with disabilities who are underserved or unserved by
DVR? If so, who?
17. From your perspective, how could DVR serve these individuals?
18. What is the most important change DVR could make to better serve people with
disabilities?
Thank you for your time and input.
Is there anything else you think we should know about the needs of persons with
disabilities or the services provided by DVR?
Who else should we talk to regarding the employment-related needs of people with
disabilities in Washington?
Washington DVR CSNA 131
Appendix N
Model Programs and Evidence-Based Practices on Employment for People with
Disabilities
Employment Programs (General)
Projects with Industry http://www.benefits.gov/benefits/benefit-
details/106
WorkFirst http://www.workfirst.wa.gov/
Job Clubs Job Club Counselor’s Manual by Nathan
Azrin
Dependable Strengths http://www.dependablestrengths.org/
cares of Washington http://webold.nsd.org/education/dept/dept.p
hp?sectionid=9541
Talent Acquisition Portal (TAP) https://tapability.org/
Veterans with Disabilities
Wounded Warrior Project http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/
Coming Home to Work Initiative http://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/
admin21/M28/M28R/Part_III/III_B_2.pdf
Disabled Veterans Outreach Program http://www.benefits.gov/benefits/benefit-
details/106
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Work Support at Virginia Commonwealth
University
http://www.worksupport.com/index.cfm
Transition-Age Youth with Disabilities
Work Support at Virginia Commonwealth
University
http://www.worksupport.com/index.cfm
Center for Change in Transition Services http://www.seattleu.edu/ccts/default.aspx?i
d=34548
Project SEARCH High School Transition
Program
http://www.projectsearch.us/
Adult Transition Program (ATP) -
Networks
http://webold.nsd.org/education/dept/dept.p
hp?sectionid=9541
Native Americans with Disabilities
Indian Native American (INA) Program http://www.wtb.wa.gov/NativeAmericanPr
ograms_Dir..asp
Mental Health
Dartmouth IPS Supported Employment
Center
http://sites.dartmouth.edu/ips/
Great Minds @ Work http://www.awbinstitute.org/greatmindswo
rk/
Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities
OLS at Bellevue College http://olsatbellevuecollege.com/